Skip to main content
Enter a keyword
  • Login
  • Home

    Main navigation

    Menu
    • US Law
      • Chapter 15 Cases
    • Regions
      • Africa
      • Asia Pacific
      • Europe
      • North Africa/Middle East
      • North America
      • South America
    • Headlines
    • Education Resources
      • ABI Committee Articles
      • ABI Journal Articles
      • Covid 19
      • Conferences and Webinars
      • Newsletters
      • Publications
    • Events
    • Firm Articles
    • About Us
      • ABI International Board Committee
      • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
    • Join
    Third Circuit upholds denial of secured creditors’ right to credit bid under reorganization plan
    2010-03-25

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held, in a split decision, on March 22, 2010, that secured creditors do not have a statutory right to credit bid1 their debt at an asset sale conducted under a “cramdown” reorganization plan. In re Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC, et al., --- F.3d ----, 2010 WL 1006647 (3d Cir. March 22, 2010) (2-1).

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Collateral (finance), Statutory interpretation, Federal Reporter, Limited liability company, Debt, Liability (financial accounting), Fair market value, Secured creditor, Secured loan, United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Michael L. Cook , Adam C. Harris , Lawrence V. Gelber
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    Third Circuit refines break-up standard
    2010-02-04

    Break-up fees1 remain difficult for initial (or so-called “stalking horse”) bidders to obtain in the Third Circuit. In Kelson Channelview LLC v. Reliant Energy Channelview LP (In re Reliant Energy Channelview LP), No. 09-2074 (3d Cir. Jan.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Shareholder, Debtor, Limited liability company, Testimony, Bright-line rule, Business judgement rule, United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Lawrence V. Gelber , James T. Bentley
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    Pennsylvania district court denies secured creditors’ right to credit bid in sale auction where debtors had proposed to provide them the “indubitable equivalent” of their claims under plan of reorganization
    2009-11-13

    On Nov. 10, 2009, a Pennsylvania district court held that secured creditors do not have an absolute right to credit bid1 their debt under the Bankruptcy Code (the “Code”) in an asset sale conducted pursuant to a “cramdown” plan of reorganization that proposes to provide the secured creditors with the “indubitable equivalent” of their claims. In re Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC, Civil Action 09-00178 at 57 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 10, 2009). This decision is on appeal to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.

    Facts

    Filed under:
    USA, Pennsylvania, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Credit (finance), Debtor, Collateral (finance), Limited liability company, Debt, Fair market value, Secured creditor, Secured loan, Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Michael L. Cook , Lawrence V. Gelber , Adam C. Harris , David M. Hillman , Brian D. Pfeiffer
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    Delaware’s high court affirms dismissal of creditor’s suit against directors
    2007-05-25

    The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed on May 18, 2007, the Delaware Chancery Court’s dismissal of a breach of fiduciary duty suit brought by a creditor against certain directors of Clearwire Holdings Inc. North American Catholic Educational Programming Foundation, Inc. v. Gheewalla, C.A. No. 1456-N (May 18, 2007).

    Whether a creditor may assert a direct claim against corporate directors for breach of fiduciary duty when the corporation is insolvent or in the so-called “zone of insolvency.”

    Answer: No.

    Filed under:
    USA, Company & Commercial, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP, Bankruptcy, Shareholder, Breach of contract, Fraud, Fiduciary, Board of directors, Limited liability company, Beneficiary, Standing (law), Good faith, Commercial law, Derivative suit, Westlaw, Delaware Court of Chancery, Delaware Supreme Court
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP
    Another wave of standard register company preference actions filed
    2016-05-16

    From May 11 to May 13, 2016, SRC Liquidation, LLC International Holdings, LLC (“Liquidating Debtor”), unleashed yet another wave of preference actions, filing approximately 257 additional complaints seeking the avoidance and recovery of allegedly preferential and fraudulent transfers under Sections 547 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Liquidating Debtor also seeks to disallow claims of such preference defendants under Sections 502(d) and (j) of the Bankruptcy Code.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Fox Rothschild LLP, Limited liability company, Liquidation
    Authors:
    Carl D. Neff
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Fox Rothschild LLP
    A closer look at the Bicent Power bankruptcy
    2012-04-29

    Introduction

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Energy & Natural Resources, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fox Rothschild LLP, Bankruptcy, Limited liability company, Debt
    Authors:
    L. Jason Cornell
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Fox Rothschild LLP
    Security National Propertiesfiles for bankruptcy in Delaware, citing unpredictability of the financial markets
    2011-10-19

    Introduction

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Fox Rothschild LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Commercial property, Landlord, Leasehold estate, Interest, Limited liability company, Debt, Mortgage loan, Deed of trust (real estate), United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for District of Delaware
    Authors:
    L. Jason Cornell
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Fox Rothschild LLP
    Preference complaints filed in the Velocity Express bankruptcy
    2011-09-24

    Earlier this month, James Carroll in his capacity as the "Wind Down Professional" for the Velocity Express bankruptcy, began filing preference actions against various defendants.  As alleged in the preference complaints, Carroll was appointed as Velocity's Wind Down Professional under a "Wind Down Order" entered by the Delaware Bankruptcy Court in July of last year.  At the time it filed for bankruptcy, Velocity was a package delivery (aka "logistics") provider whose services included customer bulk shipments, pick-up and delivery services as well as "expedited point to point servi

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fox Rothschild LLP, Bankruptcy, Limited liability company, Limited partnership, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    L. Jason Cornell
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Fox Rothschild LLP
    Decision in Tweeter Opco, LLC., holds non-debtor controlling company liable for debtor's violation of the WARN Act
    2011-08-03

    Summary

    In a 24 page decision signed July 8, 2011, Judge Walrath of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court granted a motion to for summary judgment, holding a non-debtor defendant liable with the Debtor as a single employer for alleged WARN Act violations. Judge Walrath’s opinion is available here (the “Opinion”).

    Background

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fox Rothschild LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Class action, Federal Reporter, Limited liability company, Good faith, Summary offence, Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act 1988 (USA), United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    L. John Bird
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Fox Rothschild LLP
    Decision in Tweeter Opco once again reminds trustees of the specificity requirement in pleading preference actions
    2011-06-30

    Summary

    In an 11 page opinion published June 14, 2011, Judge Walrath ruled that a Chapter 7 Trustee’s lack of specificity in pleading a preference action was grounds for dismissal under FRCP 12(b)(6). Judge Walrath’s opinion is available here (the “Opinion”).

    Background

    Filed under:
    USA, Delaware, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fox Rothschild LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Limited liability company, Debt, Liquidation, Constitutional amendment, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (USA), Trustee
    Authors:
    L. John Bird
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Fox Rothschild LLP

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 41
    • Page 42
    • Page 43
    • Page 44
    • Current page 45
    • Page 46
    • Page 47
    • Page 48
    • Page 49
    • …
    • Next page ››
    • Last page Last »
    Home

    Quick Links

    • US Law
    • Headlines
    • Firm Articles
    • Board Committee
    • Member Committee
    • Join
    • Contact Us

    Resources

    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Conferences & Webinars
    • Covid-19
    • Newsletters
    • Publications

    Regions

    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America

    © 2025 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved

    Joining the American Bankruptcy Institute as an international member will provide you with the following benefits at a discounted price:

    • Full access to the Global Insolvency website, containing the latest worldwide insolvency news, a variety of useful information on US Bankruptcy law including Chapter 15, thousands of articles from leading experts and conference materials.
    • The resources of the diverse community of United States bankruptcy professionals who share common business and educational goals.
    • A central resource for networking, as well as insolvency research and education (articles, newsletters, publications, ABI Journal articles, and access to recorded conference presentation and webinars).

    Join now or Try us out for 30 days