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
    Leveraged buyouts and fraudulent transfers: how susceptible are you to avoidance?
    2010-02-10

    As the economy boomed in 2005-2007 and leverage increased to staggering levels, LBOs took a prominent place in the deal economy. During that time, investors completed 313 LBOs in the United States for approximately $630 billion.1 Following the recent economic downturn, many of those LBOs have become sources of controversy in a number of bankruptcies and restructurings - prominent examples include Tribune Co. and Lyondell Chemical Co.

    Filed under:
    USA, Corporate Finance/M&A, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, White Collar Crime, Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP, Bankruptcy, Conflict of laws, Debtor, Fraud, Employment contract, Debt, Economy, Leveraged buyout, Leverage (finance), Circumstantial evidence, Title 11 of the US Code, Third Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
    Junior Creditors Beware: Third Circuit Awards Damages for Breach of Turnover Provision
    2022-04-26

    1 The Third Circuit also affirmed a judgment that awarded the senior creditor damages for the misapplication of such collateral proceeds in violation of the intercreditor agreement’s turnover provision.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Third Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Third Circuit Rules that Parties Cannot Contract Around the Mutuality Requirement for Setoff in Bankruptcy
    2021-05-12

    On March 19, in a matter of first impression, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (Court) held that triangular setoff is not permissible in bankruptcy due to Bankruptcy Code Section 553(a)’s mutuality requirement, and that parties cannot evade that requirement by contracting around it. See In re Orexigen Therapeutics, Inc., 990 F.3d 748 (3d Cir. 2021).

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Troutman Pepper, Bankruptcy, Third Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Troutman Pepper
    Chapter 11 plan ruled unconfirmable without a confirmation hearing
    2012-08-02

    In In reAm. Capital Equip., LLC1 the Third Circuit addressed the issue of whether a bankruptcy court has the authority to determine at the disclosure statement stage that a Chapter 11 plan is unconfirmable without holding a confirmation hearing. The court held that when a plan is patently unconfirmable, so that no dispute of material fact remains and defects cannot be cured by creditor voting, a bankruptcy court is authorized to convert the case to Chapter 7 without holding a confirmation hearing. Am.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Troutman Pepper, Debtor, Liquidation, United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Michael H. Reed , Lesley S. Welwarth
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Troutman Pepper
    Third Circuit issues important ruling on collateral valuation and lien-stripping in Chapter 11 cases
    2012-05-29

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently issued an important decision on the valuation of collateral of secured creditors and “lien-stripping” in Chapter 11 cases. In In re Heritage Highgate, Inc.,1 the court held that in a Chapter 11 case, the value of a secured creditor’s collateral under §506(a) of the Bankruptcy Code2 was the fair market value of the property as established by expert testimony and it was permissible to “strip the lien” of the creditor where it was unsupported by collateral value.

    Filed under:
    USA, Banking, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Troutman Pepper, Debtor, Collateral (finance), Liquidation, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Michael H. Reed
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Troutman Pepper
    Third Circuit holds that insurers have standing to challenge Chapter 11 plan designed to be 'insurance neutral'
    2011-05-10

    In a recent decision arising out of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case of Global Industrial Technologies, Inc. (GIT),1 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, sitting en banc, held that insurance companies that had issued liability insurance policies to a manufacturer before its bankruptcy filing had standing to object to confirmation of the company’s Chapter 11 plan of reorganization, even though the plan had been designed to be “insurance neutral” with regard to the policies.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Insurance, Litigation, Troutman Pepper, Bankruptcy, Debtor, Injunction, Class action, Standing (law), Liability (financial accounting), Holding company, Liability insurance, Title 11 of the US Code, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Michael H. Reed
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Troutman Pepper
    Looking a gift horse in the mouth: Second Circuit finds class-skipping gift violates absolute priority rule
    2011-02-14

    The Bankruptcy Code sets forth the relative priority of claims against a debtor and the waterfall in which such claims are typically paid. In order for a court to confirm a plan over a dissenting class of creditors – what is commonly called a “cram-down” – the Bankruptcy Code demands thateither (i) the dissenting class receives the full value of its claim, or (ii) no classes junior to that class receive any property under the plan on account of their junior claims or interests. This is known as the “absolute priority rule.”

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Troutman Pepper, Share (finance), Shareholder, Debtor, Unsecured debt, Interest, Debt, Consent, Secured creditor, Unsecured creditor, Warrant (finance), Secured loan, Second Circuit, United States bankruptcy court, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Henry J. Jaffe , Deborah Kovsky-Apap
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Troutman Pepper
    Is a secured creditor’s right to credit bid in a sale proposed as part of a plan dead?
    2010-11-29

    In the well-publicized opinion of In re Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC et al., 599 F. 3d 298 (3rd Cir. 2010), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, agreeing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit,1 held that Section 1129(b)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code (the Code)2 is unambiguous and is to be read in the disjunctive, thus allowing a proponent of a Chapter 11 plan of reorganization to use the "cram down" power under subsection (iii) of that Section without allowing a secured creditor to credit bid on a sale proposed as part of the plan.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Troutman Pepper, Credit (finance), Debtor, Federal Reporter, Secured creditor, Majority opinion, Secured loan, United States bankruptcy court, Fifth Circuit, Third Circuit, Seventh Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Troutman Pepper
    Tidewater Inc. Settles Its Remaining Charter Agreement Rejection Damage Claim After Judge Shannon Found Stipulated Loss Value Provision to be an Unenforceable Penalty
    2017-12-06

    On November 28, 2017, Tidewater Inc. and its affiliated debtors (collectively, the “Tidewater Debtors”) withdrew their motion objecting to final allowance of rejection damage claims of Fifth Third Equipment Finance Company (“Fifth Third”). The notice of withdrawal indicated that Fifth Third, the sole remaining non-settling vessel lessor, resolved its dispute with the Tidewater Debtors pursuant to which Fifth Third’s “Sale Leaseback Claim” was allowed in the amount of $67,500,000.

    Filed under:
    USA, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Shipping & Transport, Cole Schotz PC, Liquidated damages, Third Circuit
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Cole Schotz PC
    The Third Circuit Weighs in on The Warn Act
    2017-09-18

    Short Summary

    Filed under:
    USA, Employment & Labor, Insolvency & Restructuring, Litigation, Cole Schotz PC, Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act 1988 (USA), Code of Federal Regulations, Third Circuit
    Authors:
    Myles R. MacDonald
    Location:
    USA
    Firm:
    Cole Schotz PC

    Pagination

    • First page « First
    • Previous page ‹‹
    • …
    • Page 62
    • Page 63
    • Page 64
    • Page 65
    • Current page 66
    • Page 67
    • Page 68
    • Page 69
    • Page 70
    • …
    • 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