The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of an adversary proceeding without leave to amend, holding that:
(a) the debtors failed to state a claim for wrongful foreclosure under California law;
(b) the debtors failed to state a claim for breach of contract or breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing because they were not third-party beneficiaries of the pooling and servicing agreement;
On June 8, 2017, Clifford J. White III, director of the U.S. Trustee Program(“UST Program”)[1], proclaimed before a congressional subcommittee that “debtors with assets or income derived from marijuana may not proceed through the bankruptcy system.”
In a recent case1 out of the bankruptcy court for the Southern District of Florida (the “Court”), a secured creditor moved to dismiss a debtor’s bankruptcy case “for cause” based on the debtor’s bad faith filing.2 The debtor owned certain commercial real estate in south Florida (the “Commercial Property”) and leased space to various tenants, one of which had recently applied for both state and federal licenses to sell medical marijuana.3 The secured creditor had a first-position mortgage on the Commercial Property.4 After a decade-long lending relationship soured, the debtor initiated a len
On April 3, 2017 the Suffolk County Supreme Court granted Nationstar Mortgage LLC’s motion for summary judgment to recover defaulted mortgage payments in a potentially trailblazing foreclosure decision. Nationstar Mortgage LLC v. MacPherson, 2017 NY Slip Op 27120 (Sup. Ct. Suff. Co.
SNDA Basics
A subordination, nondisturbance and attornment agreement (“SNDA”) is commonly used in real estate financing to clarify the rights and obligations between the owner of rental property (i.e., the borrower), the lender that provides financing secured by the property, and the tenant under a lease of the property in the event the lender forecloses or otherwise acquires title to the property. As suggested by its name, an SNDA has the following three primary components:
Predictions that retailers would increasingly find themselves filing bankruptcy, whether for the first or second time, are proving true mid-year. See January 2017 Alix Partners Survey at p. 2.
In an important decision for secured creditors, the Ninth Circuit recently held that the proper “cramdown” valuation of a secured creditor’s collateral is its replacement value, regardless of whether the foreclosure value would generate a higher valuation of the collateral. The appellate court’s decision has the potential to significantly impact lenders that include certain types of restrictions on the use of the collateral (such as low income housing requirements) in their financing documents.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently concluded that Michigan’s assignment of rents statute sufficiently deprived the assignor of the ownership of the rents such that the rents could not be included in the assignor’s bankruptcy estate.
Even with all the development of the last 20 years, Brooklyn, the most populous of New York City’s five boroughs, now approaching 2.7 million residents, continues to attract strong interest from developers, each scouring the borough to see where value can be created. Development generates demand as new residents require new retail and amenity services and increasingly new office clusters for entrepreneurs freed from the Manhattan central business districts by technology and preferring to locate closer to where their employees live.
A recent decision by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals may have muddied the question of the impact of collateral rent assignments on a debtor’s ability to re-organize under chapter 11.