On November 8, 2021, ORG GC Midco LLC of Houston, TX filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (Case No. 21-90015).
An emerging issue facing bankruptcy courts in subchapter V — small business reorganization cases[1] — is whether the 19 categories of debts listed in section 523(a) of the Bankruptcy Code are subject to discharge in a cramdown confirmation of a corporate debtor’s plan of reorganization.
A newly created subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson recently filed Chapter 11 to manage 38,000 pending talc-related lawsuits and future talc-related claims. There is nothing especially new about using Chapter 11 to deal with mass tort litigation. In the past three decades, thousands of companies, dozens of religious organizations, and even the Boy Scouts of America have filed Chapter 11 because of mass tort claims.
Fraudulent transfers and actions to avoid them are second nature to both debtor and creditor attorneys. Although the exact requirements may vary amongst state and federal laws, a typical example includes a debtor that transfers its interest in some form of property to another party with the actual intent to prevent a creditor from collecting against that property. However, as unique as the state itself, a previously seldom-used loophole to fraudulent transfer law in Texas has jumped to the forefront of restructuring strategy—the Texas Two Step.
Unless the owner of a limited liability company elects to be treated as a corporation for tax purposes, the IRS will treat a single-member LLC as a “disregarded entity” for tax purposes. As a disregarded entity, an LLC’s assets, liabilities, income and deductions are reported as belonging to the owner for tax purposes. Markell Co. v.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently ruled in a case involving a Chapter 13 debtors’ attempt to shield contributions to a 401(k) retirement account from “projected disposable income,” therefore making such amounts inaccessible to the debtors’ creditors.[1] For the reasons explained below, the Sixth Circuit rejected the debtors’ arguments.
Case Background
On Wednesday, November 3, the House Judiciary Committee approved legislation on a party-line vote that could drastically reshape chapter 11 restructurings, particularly in cases involving significant tort liability. The bill, the Nondebtor Release Prohibition Act of 2021 (the “NRPA”) is sponsored by Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-NY), Oversight Chairman Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), and Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI), who chairs the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law, which has jurisdiction over bankruptcy law-related issues.
This update summarises the latest jurisprudence on insolvent schemes of arrangement (schemes) and restructuring plans (RPs), and provides an overview of the key themes that are emerging in this area.
Key Concepts and Notes
On October 31, 2021, PWM Property Management LLC, along with several affiliates that own premium commercial space in New York and Chicago, filed a petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (Case No. 21-11445). The company reports $1 to 10 billion in assets and liabilities.
A person in possession of a debtor’s property upon a bankruptcy filing now has more guidance from the Supreme Court as to the effect of the automatic stay. In City of Chicago, Illinois v. Fulton, 141 S. Ct. 585 (2021), handed down on January 14 of 2021, the Court was faced with the issue of whether the City of Chicago (the “City”) was liable for violation of the automatic stay for refusing to return vehicles it impounded pre-petition. Issuing a narrow decision under Section 362(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Court held that it was not.