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
    U.S. Supreme Court clarifies that Chapter 13 debtors may not deduct car ownership expenses when they make no loan or lease payments
    2011-01-18

    In Ransom v. FIA Card Servs., N.A., --- S.Ct. ----, 2011 WL 66438 (U.S. 2011), the United States Supreme Court took up the question of whether a Chapter 13 debtor who owns his or her vehicle outright (“free and clear”) may claim an allowance for car ownership costs and thereby reduce the amount that he or she will repay creditors. In her first opinion, Justice Kagan answered simply—no. The Ransom opinion has been seen as a victory for not only credit card companies like the one involved but other creditors, as well.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Frost Brown Todd LLP, Bankruptcy, Costs in English law, Debtor, Unsecured debt, Debt, Tax deduction, Internal Revenue Service (USA), Supreme Court of the United States, Ninth Circuit, Bankruptcy Appellate Panel
    Authors:
    Kyle Melloan
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Frost Brown Todd LLP
    The absolute priority rule and gifting plans in the Second Circuit: the gift that stopped giving
    2011-02-09

    On February 7, 2011, in In re DBSD North America, Inc.,1 the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit released its opinion joining the Third Circuit in condemning socalled “gifting plans,” thus deepening the perceived circuit split with the First Circuit which has been interpreted as approving of gifting plans. In so doing, the Second Circuit relied on the U.S. Supreme Court cases of Bank of Am. Nat’l Trust & Sav. Ass’n v. 203 N. LaSalle St. P’ship2 and Norwest Bank Worthington v.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Greenberg Traurig LLP, Share (finance), Shareholder, Debtor, Unsecured debt, Interest, Liquidation, Unsecured creditor, Warrant (finance), Sprint Corporation, Supreme Court of the United States, Second Circuit, United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit, First Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Greenberg Traurig LLP
    Ability to gift new equity to old equity through plan disapproved in the Second Circuit and ulterior motives in purchasing debt could lead to designation of vote
    2011-02-14

    On February 8, 2011, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion that will have a major impact on Chapter 11 plan confirmation. In consolidated appeals stemming from theIn re DBSD North America, Inc. bankruptcy case, the Second Circuit held that (1) the “gifting” aspect of the debtors’ plan of reorganization violated the absolute priority rule, and (2) the bankruptcy court did not err in designating a secured creditor’s vote as lacking “good faith” and disregarding that vote for purposes of confirmation.

    The DBSD Plan

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Haynes and Boone LLP, Share (finance), Bankruptcy, Shareholder, Debtor, Interest, Debt, Secured creditor, Warrant (finance), Dish Network, US Code, Supreme Court of the United States, Second Circuit, United States bankruptcy court
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Haynes and Boone LLP
    Upcoming cases in the United States Supreme Court’s 2010 term: Volume II
    2011-02-15

    The Supreme Court’s 2010-2011 term began in October, and it is expected to conclude by the end of April. We have been monitoring the decisions of our nation’s highest court and you may have already read some of the summaries of the major decisions written by Larkin Hoffman attorneys. This update provides a brief look at some of the cases that have been scheduled for oral argument since our last update in November.

    Filed under:
    USA, Capital Markets, Employment & Labor, Healthcare & Life Sciences, Insolvency & Restructuring, Intellectual Property, IT & Data Protection, Litigation, Product Regulation & Liability, Public, Telecoms, Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd, Bankruptcy, Information privacy, First Amendment, Negligence, Federal Communications Commission (USA), AT&T, Freedom of Information Act (1967) (USA), Supreme Court of the United States, Ninth Circuit, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Ashlee M Bekish , John Kvinge
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd
    The Supreme Court rules that Chapter 13 debtor cannot take an ownership deduction for a paid-off car
    2011-02-15

    In the first opinion authored by Justice Elena Kagan, the Supreme Court ruled that a Chapter 13 debtor may not deduct the “ownership costs” of a vehicle under the means test when he owes no further payments on the vehicle, affirming a decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The 8-1 opinion featured a pro-debtor dissent by Justice Scalia.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd, Credit card, Costs in English law, Debtor, Tax deduction, Dissenting opinion, Majority opinion, Internal Revenue Service (USA), Supreme Court of the United States, Ninth Circuit
    Authors:
    Richard (Jay) J Reding
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd
    From the top: recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling
    2011-04-01

    The U.S. Supreme Court’s October 2010 Term (which extends from October 2010 to October 2011, although the Court hears argument only until June or July) officially got underway on October 4, three days after Elena Kagan was formally sworn in as the Court’s 112th Justice and one of three female Justices sitting on the Court.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Jones Day, Bankruptcy, Costs in English law, Debtor, Federal Reporter, Ex post facto law, Debt, Tax deduction, Dissenting opinion, Majority opinion, Internal Revenue Service (USA), US Congress, Westlaw, Article III US Constitution, Supreme Court of the United States, Ninth Circuit
    Authors:
    Mark G. Douglas
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Jones Day
    Supreme Court adopts amendments to Bankruptcy Rule 2019 on disclosure requirements for multiple creditors and equity security holders acting in concert in Chapter 11 cases
    2011-04-29

    On April 26, 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States adopted a completely revamped version of Rule 2019 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure to govern disclosure requirements for groups and committees that consist of or represent multiple creditors or equity security holders, as well as lawyers and other entities that represent multiple creditors or equity security holders, acting in concert to advance common interests in a chapter 9 or chapter 11 bankruptcy case.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP, Bond (finance), Bankruptcy, Short (finance), Security (finance), Class action, Interest, Discovery, Swap (finance), Stakeholder (corporate), Solicitation, Credit default swap, Constitutional amendment, Trustee, Supreme Court of the United States
    Authors:
    Brad Eric Scheler , Jean E. Hanson , Gary L. Kaplan , Shannon Lowry Nagle , Jennifer L. Rodburg
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson LLP
    Supreme Court approves amendments to Bankruptcy Rule 2019
    2011-05-06

    On April 26, 2011, the Supreme Court approved a number of amendments to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. In particular, the Supreme Court amended Bankruptcy Rule 2019 to clarify the disclosure required of certain parties in interest in a chapter 9 or 11 bankruptcy case.1 These amendments were drafted by a panel of bankruptcy judges and restructuring experts and are intended to resolve a split in decisions concerning the proper application of the current Bankruptcy Rule 2019.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Chadbourne & Parke LLP, Bankruptcy, Short (finance), Debtor, Class action, Interest, Discovery, Option (finance), Swap (finance), Hedge funds, Debt, Stakeholder (corporate), Distressed securities, Credit default swap, US Congress, Constitutional amendment, Supreme Court of the United States
    Authors:
    Howard Seife , Seven Rivera , Francisco Vazquez
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Chadbourne & Parke LLP
    Supreme Court adopts amended bankruptcy Rule 2019
    2011-05-04

    On April 26, 2011, the Supreme Court of the United States adopted amended Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2019 (“Rule 2019”). Rule 2019 governs disclosure requirements for groups and committees that consist of or represent multiple creditors or equity security holders, as well as lawyers and other entities that represent multiple creditors or equity security holders, acting in concert in a chapter 9 or chapter 11 bankruptcy case.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Greenberg Traurig LLP, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Interest, Discovery, Option (finance), Swap (finance), Stakeholder (corporate), Credit default swap, Title 11 of the US Code, Supreme Court of the United States, US District Court for District of Delaware, US District Court for the Southern District of New York
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Greenberg Traurig LLP
    Revised form of Rule 2019 eliminates purchase price disclosures by committee members
    2011-05-11

    In chapter 11 bankruptcy cases, creditors and equity holders with common interests often find it advantageous to pool resources and form an ad hoc group or committee. Because the committee represents a larger amount of claims or interests, it speaks with more authority in the bankruptcy case, and the members are able to save money by sharing the cost of legal and financial advisors.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Ropes & Gray LLP, Bankruptcy, Security (finance), Interest, Discovery, Option (finance), Hedge funds, Economy, US Congress, Supreme Court of the United States, United States bankruptcy court
    Authors:
    Mark I. Bane , Alyson Gal Allen
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Ropes & Gray LLP

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 75
    • Page 76
    • Page 77
    • Page 78
    • Current page 79
    • Page 80
    • Page 81
    • Page 82
    • Page 83
    • …
    • 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