Agricultural economists have long warned of a looming farm crisis. However, for the most part, they have been wrong. In 2021, nationwide Chapter 12 family farmer bankruptcy filings were at second lowest level since Chapter 12 was enacted in 1987. The low level of Chapter 12 filings is all the more surprising given that Congress more than doubled the debt limit for Chapter 12 eligibility (to $10 million) in 2019.
This entry is part of Nelson Mullins’s ongoing “Bankruptcy Basics” blog series that is intended to address foundational aspects of bankruptcy for non-bankruptcy practitioners and professionals. This entry will explain the concepts of the bankruptcy “estate” and “property of the estate” and the importance thereof.
In a recent decision,1 the United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the 9th Circuit clarified an important step that construction lienholders must take to perfect their liens when the debtor has filed a bankruptcy petition before the lienholder files a foreclosure lawsuit.
A bankruptcy court’s recent decision in Bailey Tool & Mfg. Co., et al. v. Republic Bus. Credit (In re Bailey Tool & Mfg. Co.), Adv. No. 16-03025-SGJ (Bankr. N.D. Tex. Dec. 23, 2021) serves as a reminder for lenders that they should avoid certain actions when dealing with distressed borrowers. Specifically, in Bailey, a bankruptcy judge found a lender squarely at fault for its borrower’s bankruptcy and subsequent liquidation, and held the lender liable to the borrower’s bankruptcy estate for various breach of contract, tort, and bankruptcy claims.
Overview
Claims are “impaired,” unless the plan “leaves” their rights “unaltered.”§ 1124(1).
This rule is not as simple and unequivocal as it seems, according to an In re Hertz opinion. [Fn. 1] Here’s why.
Plan Treatment of Unsecured Claims
Claims of unsecured creditors in the Hertz bankruptcy are treated, under its Chapter 11 Plan, as follows:
Imagine this: a U.S. District Court enters judgment in a case that’s “related to” a bankruptcy, and we want to file a motion for new trial or to amend the judgment.
So, which deadline applies to the motion:
This is how Tribune ends: not with a bang, but a whimper. The 12-year litigation saga, rooted in the spectacular failure of the media and sports conglomerate’s 2007 leveraged buyout, reached an end in late February with a curt “cert. denied” from the US Supreme Court.
Morgan Lewis was one of the firms that captained the defense for Tribune’s former shareholders. This post notes some lessons that we learned—and relearned.
Lesson One: Section 546(e)’s ‘New’ Safe Harbor
Within the past 18 months, two bankruptcy courts have used the same factors, but reached opposite conclusions, about the characterization of two merchant cash advance funding transactions as either a “true sale” or not a “true sale” – and instead, a disguised financing. In doing so, the courts’ decisions confirm the importance of appropriate structuring to achieve true sale treatment.
Among many other accommodations, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) provided small business and individual debtors with expanded access to bankruptcy relief. The extended provisions include: