Last month, in a significant ruling in the General Growth Properties, Inc. (“GGP”) bankruptcy case, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York denied motions to dismiss, as bad faith filings, the bankruptcy cases of 20 purported bankruptcyremote special purpose entity (“SPE”) subsidiary debtors.1
Last year, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Merit, unanimously ruling that a buyout transaction between private parties did not qualify for “safe harbor” protection under Bankruptcy Code section 546(e), on the basis that a “financial institution” acted as an intermediary in the overarching transaction.
A recent decision of New York’s highest court potentially strengthens the ability of lenders to bring suits against third parties for participation in a borrower’s breach of single purpose entity/bankruptcy remote loan document covenants.
A New York bankruptcy court recently allowed a pro se debtor to discharge over $200,000 in student loan debt, vehemently rejecting as “punitive” more recent legal authority concerning how student loan debts may be discharged in bankruptcy.
HERE LIONS ROAM: CISG AS THE MEASURE OF A CLAIM'S
VALUE AND VALIDITY AND A DEBTOR'S
DISCHARGEABILITY
Amir Shachmurove*
INTRODUCTION ............................................ ..... 463
I. A COMEDY OF ERRORS .............. 468
II. RELEVANT BANKRUPTCY LAW: THE CODE AND THE RULES ............ 470
A. Code and Rules .......................... ......... 470
B. Determination of a Claim 's Validity and Value .............. 471
C. Temporary Valuation Pursuant to Rule 3018(a) .... ........ 475
In re Ramz Real Estate Co., LLC, 510 B.R. 712 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2013) –
An undersecured mortgagee objected to a debtor’s proposed plan of reorganization on several grounds, including that (1) the plan was not approved by a proper impaired class and (2) retention of equity by the debtor’s members violated the absolute priority rule.
Ring v. First Niagara Bank, N.A. (In re Sterling United, Inc.), 519 B.R. 586 (Bankr. W.D.N.Y. 2014) –
A chapter 7 trustee sought to recover as preferences payments made by the debtor to a lender and proceeds of collateral liquidation received by the lender based on arguments regarding whether UCC financing statements adequately perfected the lender’s security interests.
A junior mortgagee sought to subordinate the senior mortgage loan based on an argument that modification of the senior loan impaired the junior mortgagee’s rights.
In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc., 513 B.R. 624 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2014)
A purchaser of residential mortgage-backed securities filed proofs of claim based on alleged misrepresentations by the debtors in offering materials distributed in connection with sale of the securities. The debtors objected and sought to subordinate the claims as claims arising from securities “of” the debtors.
Clinton County Treasurer v. Wolinsky, 511 B.R. 34 (N.D.N.Y. 2014)
A chapter 7 trustee sought to avoid a property tax foreclosure as a fraudulent transfer and then to recover damages from the foreclosing county. The bankruptcy court agreed that the transfer was a fraudulent conveyance, but awarded only about half of the damages requested by the trustee. Both the county treasurer and the trustee appealed.