The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that a debtor’s claim seeking to use a bankruptcy trustee’s § 544(a) strong-arm power to avoid a mortgage on the ground that it was never perfected did not require appellate review of the state court foreclosure judgment, and therefore was not barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held that a mortgagee’s foreclosure action did not violate an automatic stay imposed during one of the plaintiff’s chapter 13 bankruptcy schedules, where the debtor failed to amend his bankruptcy schedules to disclose his recent acquisition of the subject property from his son.

In so ruling, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the trial court’s judgment in favor of the mortgagee because father and son plaintiffs were judicially estopped from claiming a stay violation.

J&M Sales Inc., along with nine subsidiaries and affiliates, has filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Lead Case No. 18-11801). The Debtors, based in Gardena, California, are a discount retailer of brand name apparel and household items, with 344 stores and over 9,800 employees nationwide.

A fundamental tenet of chapter 11 bankruptcies is the absolute priority rule. Initially a judge-created doctrine, the absolute priority rule was partially codified in section 1129(b)(2)(B)(ii) of the Bankruptcy Code. Under section 1129, plans must be “fair and equitable” in order to be confirmed.

RM Holdco LLC (dba Real Mex Restaurants), along with five subsidiaries and affiliates, has filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Lead Case No. 18-11795).

Samuels Jewelers, Inc., a jewelry retailer headquartered in Austin, Texas, with over 100 stores in 22 states, has filed a petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 11818).

Noon Mediterranean, Inc. (f/k/a Verts Mediterranean Grill), has filed a petition for relief under chapter 11 in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 18-11814).

Municipalities often drive economic development through subsidiaries and affiliated entities. When these “quasi-municipalities” become distressed, however, questions arise as to whether the potential debtor qualifies as a debtor under Chapter 11 or Chapter 9. This uncertainty can lead to litigation over whether the entity may proceed as a Chapter 11 debtor or is a governmental unit that must proceed through a Chapter 9 bankruptcy filing. In states where Chapter 9 is not authorized, Chapter 11 may be the only available option for a supervised restructuring.

In Topfer v. Topfer (In re Topfer), Case No. 5-18-ap-00066 RNO (M.D. Pa. July 25, 2018), the Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania remanded a three-and half year old divorce proceeding that had been removed to bankruptcy court. But, the remand became more complicated than it needed to be.

The chapter 7 debtor had removed the divorce action immediately after filing for chapter 7 bankruptcy. Shortly after removal, the non-debtor spouse moved to remand the case on mandatory abstention and permissive abstention grounds.

The Bottom Line