Skip to main content
Enter a keyword
  • Login
  • Home

    Main navigation

    Menu
    • US Law
      • Chapter 15 Cases
    • Regions
      • Africa
      • Asia Pacific
      • Europe
      • North Africa/Middle East
      • North America
      • South America
    • Headlines
    • Education Resources
      • ABI Committee Articles
      • ABI Journal Articles
      • Covid 19
      • Conferences and Webinars
      • Newsletters
      • Publications
    • Events
    • Firm Articles
    • About Us
      • ABI International Board Committee
      • ABI International Member Committee Leadership
    • Join
    Alberta Receiver recognized in Colorado under Chapter 15 of the US Bankruptcy Code
    2008-02-28

    Ernst & Young Inc. was appointed by the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta as the Receiver and Manager of an Alberta Corporation named Klytie’s Development Inc., its Colorado subsidiary, and the two primary shareholders of the debtor companies

    Filed under:
    Canada, USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Dentons, Shareholder, Debtor, Consumer protection, Investment funds, Common law, Subsidiary, Securities Act 1933 (USA), Title 11 of the US Code, United States bankruptcy court
    Location:
    Canada, USA
    Firm:
    Dentons
    Court of Appeal upholds that assistance can be given to Australian court
    2011-08-12

    In New Cap Reinsurance Corporation Ltd & Anr v AE Grant & Ors, the Court of Appeal has upheld a first instance decision that section 426 of the Insolvency Act (IA) can be used to enforce a foreign monetary judgment in insolvency proceedings. However, the Court acknowledged that where there exists a statutory framework for the enforcement of foreign judgments, in this case enforcement pursuant to the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 (the 1933 Act), then enforcement under s.426 of the IA must follow the requirements of the 1933 Act.

    Filed under:
    United Kingdom, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Locke Lord LLP, Reinsurance, Enforcement of foreign judgments, The Australian, Securities Act 1933 (USA), Supreme Court of the United States, Court of Appeal of England & Wales
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Firm:
    Locke Lord LLP
    Failure To Comply With Plan Technicality Causes US Securities Law Violation
    2017-10-10

    Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 prohibits the sale of a security unless a registration statement is in effect. This prohibition on the sale of unregistered securities does not apply to exempt transactions. One such exemption is found in the Bankruptcy Code — section 1145 provides that securities issued under a plan of reorganization may be exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act. For debtors, the recent decision of Golden v. Mentor Capital, Inc., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 153415 (D. Ut. Sept.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Dechert LLP, Securities Act 1933 (USA), United States bankruptcy court
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Dechert LLP
    The Supreme Court Clarifies Securities Act Statute of Repose Not Tolled by Filing of Class Action
    2017-06-28

    In a bout of déjà vu, the Supreme Court decided to hear California Public Employees’ Retirement System v. ANZ Securities, Inc., et al. to settle the issue of whether the Securities Act of 1933’s (the “Securities Act”) three-year statute of repose is subject to tolling.[1] On June 26, 2017, the Supreme Court made the following noteworthy and defendant-friendly holdings:

    Filed under:
    USA, Capital Markets, Employee Benefits & Pensions, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kane Russell Coleman Logan PC, Security (finance), Class action, Statute of limitations, Securities Act 1933 (USA)
    Authors:
    Vienna Flores
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Kane Russell Coleman Logan PC
    Marblegate: Southern District’s TIA Decision Reversed - Now What?
    2017-02-14

    On January 17, 2017, a divided (2-1) panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (Second Circuit) reversed the decision of the District Court for the Southern District of New York (Southern District) in the Marblegate litigation1 (Marblegate) with respect to the interpretation of Section 316(b) of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (TIA).

    Filed under:
    USA, New York, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Sidley Austin LLP, Security (finance), Securities Act 1933 (USA), Second Circuit
    Authors:
    Craig E. Chapman , Eric S. Haueter , Alan G Grinceri , Michael Hyatte , Edward D. Ricchiuto , Paul Michael Jindra
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Sidley Austin LLP
    Marblegate v. EDMC: What does the Second Circuit’s Opinion Say (and Not Say) About Releasing a Guarantee?
    2017-02-01

    Although there has been much discussion of the Second Circuit’s recent decision in Marblegate, this article addresses a question other commentators have yet to tackle: namely, how the Second Circuit’s decision impacts the Trust Indenture Act’s protection of guarantee obligations included in an indenture. Below we provide our view on how Marblegate affects indenture guarantees. More specifically, we discuss how the decision is consistent with provisions of the TIA that expressly protect a noteholder’s payment rights under a guarantee.

    Synopsis

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Securities Act 1933 (USA), Second Circuit
    Authors:
    James H. Millar
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
    Court approves $125 million New Century settlement
    2010-08-10

    Yesterday, a federal judge preliminary approved a $125 million cash settlement for former shareholders of New Century Financial Corp. (“New Century”). New Century was the second largest subprime mortgage originator before it filed for bankruptcy in April 2007. In February 2008, Michael J.

    Filed under:
    USA, California, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Alston & Bird LLP, Bankruptcy, Shareholder, Board of directors, Subprime lending, General counsel, Underwriting, Preferred stock, Securities fraud, KPMG, Securities Act 1933 (USA), Chief executive officer, Chief financial officer, US District Court for Central District of California
    Authors:
    Tara Castillo
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Alston & Bird LLP
    Fact inquiry necessary to determinate which sales of securities were "by means of" misstatements
    2010-10-22

    The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Massachusetts recently denied a motion for summary judgment on the issue of damages by investors in Access Cardiosystems, Inc. against one of the defendants, Randall Fincke. The investors had asserted claims against Mr.

    Filed under:
    USA, Massachusetts, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Security (finance), Patent infringement, Fraud, Misrepresentation, Legal burden of proof, Causation (law), Westlaw, Securities Act 1933 (USA), United States bankruptcy court, US District Court for District of Massachusetts
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
    Margin violation is not an affirmative defense to an action on a note
    2010-10-20

    COSTELLO v. GRUNDON (October 18, 2010)

    Filed under:
    USA, Employee Benefits & Pensions, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Kelley Drye & Warren LLP, Share (finance), Bankruptcy, Unsecured debt, Breach of contract, Fraud, Discovery, Vacated judgment, Misrepresentation, Prima facie, Securities Act 1933 (USA), Trustee
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
    A loan trader’s guide to reorganization equity
    2011-02-24

    The trading rules and conventions of the loan market are well known to its participants. Similarly, the laws and practices governing equity securities trading in the U.S. are quite familiar to securities market professionals. The opportunity for confusion may arise, however, when these two markets quickly converge—for example, when the loans of a reorganized borrower are converted into or satisfied by the issuance of equity securities.

    Filed under:
    USA, Capital Markets, Insolvency & Restructuring, Richards Kibbe & Orbe LLP, Confidentiality, Tax exemption, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Security (finance), Safe harbor (law), Insider trading, Distressed securities, Securities Exchange Act 1934 (USA), Securities Act 1933 (USA), Title 11 of the US Code
    Authors:
    Scott C. Budlong , Julia Lu
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Richards Kibbe & Orbe LLP

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • Page 1
    • Current page 2
    • Page 3
    • Next page ››
    • Last page Last »
    Home

    Quick Links

    • US Law
    • Headlines
    • Firm Articles
    • Board Committee
    • Member Committee
    • Join
    • Contact Us

    Resources

    • ABI Committee Articles
    • ABI Journal Articles
    • Conferences & Webinars
    • Covid-19
    • Newsletters
    • Publications

    Regions

    • Africa
    • Asia Pacific
    • Europe
    • North Africa/Middle East
    • North America
    • South America

    © 2025 Global Insolvency, All Rights Reserved

    Joining the American Bankruptcy Institute as an international member will provide you with the following benefits at a discounted price:

    • Full access to the Global Insolvency website, containing the latest worldwide insolvency news, a variety of useful information on US Bankruptcy law including Chapter 15, thousands of articles from leading experts and conference materials.
    • The resources of the diverse community of United States bankruptcy professionals who share common business and educational goals.
    • A central resource for networking, as well as insolvency research and education (articles, newsletters, publications, ABI Journal articles, and access to recorded conference presentation and webinars).

    Join now or Try us out for 30 days