As many areas continue to rebound slightly from the real-estate downturn, much litigation still exists related to the exposure of guarantors for corporate-entity real estate loans. In many instances a corporation or Limited Liability Company (LLC) may have filed for Chapter 11 in an effort to stave off a foreclosure and restructure the secured debt. However, it is well settled that a corporate bankruptcy case does not operate to discharge a guaranty from a guarantor who is not in bankruptcy.
Have you ever wanted to start your own marijuana cultivation and distribution business? Do you see billboards on the highway advertising pot-growing seminars and think, “Maybe I should go?” Does the grass seem greener on the other side?
Asarco LLC v. Goodwin, 756 F.3d 191 (2nd Cir. 2014) –
A reorganized company (Asarco) sought contribution for payment of environmental claims from beneficiaries of trusts created under John D. Rockefeller’s will. The district court dismissed the claims, and Asarco appealed to the 2d Circuit.
Consumer debtors file bankruptcy for many of reasons, but all ultimately want the same thing: a discharge of their debts. Stated very generally, a bankruptcy discharge operates to remove the personal liability of a consumer debtor from his or her pre-petition debts. Depending on whether a debtor files Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy, they can obtain a discharge within a few months after filing bankruptcy or following the completion of a five year plan of reorganization. During bankruptcy, a debtor is protected by the automatic stay.
On September 26, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, overturning decisions by the Bankruptcy Court and the District Court for the Southern District of New York, held that the Bankruptcy Court was required to review under section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code the transfer of a claim by a chapter 15 debtor with a recognized foreign main proceeding pending in the British Virgin Islands (the “BVI”).1 In a case under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code in which a foreign main proceeding has been recognized, section 1520(a)(2) of the Bankr
A case against a hedge fund, and one of its partners and in-house counsel, related to actions at a portfolio company and alleging breach of fiduciary duties survived a motion to dismiss. The portfolio company, alleged to be insolvent, was a credit derivative product company that had a subsidiary that wrote credit default swaps.
On Monday, October 6, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order denying the petition for a writ of certiorari in the Jaffe v. Samsung case, also known as the Qimonda case.
Generally, the priority scheme in section 507 of the Bankruptcy Code dictates the order in which a creditor is paid.
In Snyder v. California Insurance Guarantee Association, the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, considered when the three-year statute of limitations for a cause of action against the California Insurance Guarantee Association (CIGA) accrues. The statute does not begin to run until a “covered claim” matures and is denied. CIGA’s denial in an answer to a complaint for declaratory relief did not satisfy this requirement.