In re Goody’s Family Clothing, Inc- F3d – 2010 WL 2671929 (3d Cir June 29, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
JELD-WEN, Inc v Van Brunt (In re Grossman’s Inc), (3d Cir No 09-1563, June 2, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
In re Spansion, Inc, 426 BR 114 (Bankr Del April 1, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
In re Exide Technologies, 607 F3d 957 (3rd Cir June 1, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Allegheny Health, Education and Research Foundation v PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP(3d Cir No 07-1397, May 28, 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Delaware Bankruptcy Court"), recently in In re Leslie Controls, Inc., Bankr. D. Del., Case No. 10-12199, expounded on whether attorney-client and attorney work-product privileged documents remained protected from discovery under the common interest doctrine. The common interest doctrine permits counsel representing different clients with similar legal interests to share information without having to disclose that information to others.
Cooper v Centar Investments LTD, et al. (In re Trigem America Corporation), 431 B.R. 855 (C.D. Cal. 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of TOUSA, Inc. v. Technical Olympic, S.A. (In re TOUSA, Inc.), 2010 WL 3835829 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v Credit Suisse (In re Champion Enterprises, Inc.), 2010 WL 3522132 (Bankr. D. Del. 2010)
CASE SNAPSHOT
We are seeing more and more challenges by borrowers to swaps. No big surprise since, with falling interest rates over the past few years, the borrowers are on the wrong end of the transactions. Although swaps are considered independent of the loans, they are often secured by the same collateral and are usually crossdefaulted with the loans, so the obligations that arise from early termination (which can be significant) become part of the collection process and are being fought vigorously by borrowers.