On July 10, 2012, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Kentucky ruled that the Council on Occupational Education, Inc., the accreditor for Decker College, Inc., made factually erroneous statements to DOE. In re Decker College, Inc., Case No. 05-61805 (W.D. Ky. July 10, 2012), Dkt. 198 at 18. Specifically, the Court found that the accreditor had falsely informed DOE that Decker College had not been accredited to offer distance education programs.

In Salyersville Nat’l Bank v. Bailey (In re Bailey), 664 F.3d 1026 (6th Cir.

On January 1, 2016, Kentucky joined a growing movement among states across the country to revise fraudulent transfer statutes. Kentucky accomplished this by repealing its statutes on fraudulent transfers and preferential transfers (KRS 378.010 et seq.), and replacing them with the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (“UVTA”) (KRS 378A.005 et seq.). The UVTA was designed to replace the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”) that was previously adopted by 43 other states (which did not include Kentucky).

Irvin v. Faller (In re Faller)

(Bankr. W.D. Ky. Mar. 17, 2016)

(7th Cir. Mar. 4, 2016)

On January 1, 2016, the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (UVTA) was enacted in Kentucky and can be found at KRS 378A.005 e seq.  The UVTA replaces KRS 378, which contained KRS 378.010, the Kentucky fraudulent conveyance statute, and KRS 378.060, the Kentucky preference statute.  Nationally, the UVTA will replace the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”).  According to the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, California, Georgia, Idaho, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina, and North Dakota have joined Kentucky in enacting the UVTA. 

Bankruptcy often has a significant impact on the way a business operates. This makes sense, given that businesses going through the bankruptcy process have to figure out a way to make themselves viable after the process is complete. Oftentimes, part of what has to happen for a business to remain viable going forward after a bankruptcy is to sell off assets and portions of the business.

When a contract is called a lease and has some characteristics of a lease, but operates to grant the lessee the exclusive right to mine and remove coal from the premises, how should the contract be treated in bankruptcy?  In a 

Another of Kentucky’s rural hospitals just filed bankruptcy, stating that it has been exploring sale options for a year, and that it has recently decided that a sale through the bankruptcy court process is its best option.

(Bankr. W.D. Ky. Aug. 10, 2017)

The bankruptcy court denies the U.S. Trustee’s motion to enter an order for sanctions and requiring disgorgement of fees. The attorney had provided advice to the debtor about the petition and schedules that the debtor had drafted. The attorney was not aware that a bankruptcy was filed until he received the U.S. Trustee’s motion. The court declines to grant the relief requested under these circumstances. Opinion below.

Judge: Lloyd