The Coronavirus pandemic, while primarily a public health issue, is creating numerous legal concerns. We have identified some of the key issues and developments below. In addition, we have formed a task force comprised of partners and senior lawyers from across all practice groups and offices to track developments and provide timely guidance to clients on Coronavirus-related issues.

M&A

Under the "single-satisfaction rule," although a bankruptcy trustee or a chapter 11 debtor-in-possession ("DIP") may seek to avoid and recover avoidable transfers of a debtor's property from more than one transferee, the aggregate recovery is limited to the value of the property transferred. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit examined this rule in Jones v. Brand Law Firm PA (In re Belmonte), 931 F.3d 147 (2d Cir. 2019).

A real estate developer faced foreclosure and the loss of a large and very visible condominium project in Manhattan. A prominent New York City real estate investor, Philip Pilevsky, with help from his family members tried to rescue the developer by implementing a fairly obvious and perfectly legal technique to delay the foreclosure by almost a year.  

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently affirmed judgment against a borrower for quiet title claims brought against the owner and servicer of her mortgage loan, and entered judgment of foreclosure in the loan owner and servicer’s favor on their counterclaims for foreclosure against the borrower.

Associations are all too familiar with bankruptcy serial filers disrupting foreclosure sales leading to frustrating and costly consequences for the Association. Each new bankruptcy filing by the debtor forces the Association to incur additional costs and increases the amount of debt owed while the debtor continues to live on the property without paying the Association.

In a putative class action of borrowers who received mortgage statements after a bankruptcy discharge, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently reversed a trial court order denying certification for failure to establish predominance.

The last several years have been treacherous for the retail sector. Changing shopping patterns and shifting demographics have led some commentators to declare that the (retail) apocalypse is upon us.

Section 548 of the Bankruptcy Code enables trustees to avoid certain pre-bankruptcy transfers of “an interest of the debtor in property,” where the transfer was intended to defraud creditors or where the transfer was made while the debtor was insolvent and was not for reasonably equivalent value. 11 U.S.C. § 548(a). Section 544 of the Bankruptcy Code enables trustees to avoid a transfer of “property of the debtor” where a creditor of the debtor would have such a right under state law. 11 U.S.C. § 544(a).

In recent weeks, the dispute in Windstream’s bankruptcy between Windstream and its REIT spinoff Uniti Group over the lease transaction that ultimately led to Windstream’s chapter 11 bankruptcy has continued to escalate with Windstream filing an adversary complaint against Uniti. In its complaint, Windstream seeks to recharacterize the lease as a disguised financing alleging that the lease resulted in a long-term transfer of billions of dollars to Uniti to the detriment of Windstream’s creditors.

Suppose you own farmland or retail commercial space and you lease your property.

What happens to your lease if the lessee files bankruptcy? And what must be done if your lessee wants to continue to honor your lease despite the bankruptcy? In In re Collins, The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina recently stressed that a debtor cannot informally assume an unexpired lease. The debtor must follow the strict procedures in the Bankruptcy Code or the lease will be automatically rejected.