On July 25, 2016, Judge Kevin Carey of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court issued a thorough decision pursuant to a motion for judgment on the pleadings analyzing the intersection of a preference defendant’s post-petition administrative claim and their preference exposure. A copy of the Opinion is available here.

In my May 26th post, I raised several questions that unsecured creditors in any Chapter 11 case should know the answers to and take action where appropriate.

On May 5, 2016, SRC Liquidation, LLC International Holdings, LLC (“Liquidating Debtor”), filed approximately 137 complaints seeking the avoidance and recovery of allegedly preferential and fraudulent transfers under Sections 547 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Liquidating Debtor also seeks to disallow claims of such preference defendants under Sections 502(d) and (j) of the Bankruptcy Code.

The intricacies of pursuing environmental claims against financially distressed parties

In a prolonged financial downturn, it is an even more difficult burden for many companies to shoulder their own environmental remediation requirements.Pollock’s article examines the steps to consider if a co-liable potentially responsible party (PRP) is either showing signs of economic distress or has already filed in bankruptcy.  

There are generally three types of claims in a bankruptcy proceeding: unsecured claims, secured claims and administrative expense claims. Section 503 of the Bankruptcy Code governs the allowance of administrative expense claims. Section 503 provides that "after notice and a hearing, there shall be allowed administrative expenses…, including the actual and necessary costs and expenses of preserving the estate." 11 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(A).

On May 8, 2012, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Court”) entered its Order (the “Order”) Establishing Procedures to Assert Claims Arising under Section 503(b)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code (“503(b)(9) Claims”) in the chapter 11 cases of AFA Investment, Inc. and its affiliated debtors (collectively, the “Debtors”) (Bankr. D. Del. 12-11127 (MFW)).

In a 17 page decision entered March 9, 2012, Judge Carey of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court granted a motion for relief from the Bankruptcy Code’s automatic stay to allow an undersecured creditor to exercise its remedies against a debtor’s collateral.  A copy of Judge Carey's opinion is available here (the "Opinion").  The Opinion was issued in a case nearly identical to that discussed in this post:

Did you do business with Orleans Homebuilders prior to their bankruptcy filing?  Have you received a demand for return of alleged preferential payments?  In a recent submission to the Delaware Bankruptcy Court, local developer Orleans Homebuilders stated that it intends to file as many as 400 suits to recover preferential transfers.

Introduction

This is the fifty-second in a series of installments on this blog that are discussing issues arising in the aftermath of the global Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Bernard L. Madoff (“Madoff”).