In Purdue Pharma, the U.S. Supreme Court grants certiorari on this question:
Industrial and manufacturing businesses face all kinds of challenges: pricing and competitive pressures; regulatory demands; cross-border trade regulations and obligations; and litigation risk stemming from environmental and tort claims. These challenges create risks around every corner, some even rising to the level of "bet-the-company" issues – the things that keep GCs up at night.
The United States Supreme Court agreed today to review a Fourth Circuit decision that denied an insurer standing to object to an asbestos producer’s Chapter 11 reorganization plan, on the basis that the insurer’s interests were not affected by the plan. The case provides the high court with an opportunity to resolve a recurring issue in mass tort bankruptcies which has split the circuits.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced it has reached a settlement with the bankrupt crypto company Voyager over the company’s alleged deceptive crypto marketing practices. Specifically, the FTC’s complaint alleges that from at least 2018 until its declaration of bankruptcy in July 2022, Voyager enticed consumers with promises that their deposits were insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and were “safe.” However, consumers’ deposits with Voyager were not eligible for FDIC insurance and were not protected in the event that Voyager failed.
The absolute priority rule [Fn. 1] has been a problem for businesses in bankruptcy—for a very long time! The rule dates back to at least 1899, when the U.S. Supreme Court prevents certain shareholder actions “until the interests of unsecured creditors have been preserved.” [Fn. 2]
Since then, the U.S. Supreme Court has followed a long and relatively straight road for the absolute priority rule. And the rule has shown staying power, along that road.
The Kemper/Lumbermens saga
To refresh everyone’s recollection, this is a report from Business Insurance from March 14, 2010:
The opinion is In re Legarde, Case No. 22-12184, Eastern Pennsylvania Bankruptcy Court (issued September 14, 2023; Doc. 112).
Facts
Debtor claims Creditor raped her.
Then, Debtor posts stuff about Creditor on the internet.
So, Creditor sues Debtor for defamation, alleging willful and malicious conduct.
Bankruptcy Developments
Climate risk is difficult for large corporations to mitigate and is increasingly a C-suite agenda item. In this article, experts from FTI Consulting’s Power, Renewables & Energy Transition (“PRET”) practice draw upon their experience in climate risk-related bankruptcy, dispute advisory, restructuring and resource strategies to summarize the regulatory, operational and financial impacts of recent extreme weather events on electric utilities. This article will discuss the implications of strengthening physical and financial asset performance in a rapidly evolving electric grid.
In the October 2023 edition of the Restructuring Department Bulletin, we highlight recent decisions and developments impacting the restructuring arena and share the latest news on the Paul, Weiss Restructuring Department.
The Eighth Circuit held that “avoidance actions [e.g., preferences, fraudulent transfers] can be sold as property of the [Chapter 7 debtor’s] estate.” In re Simply Essentials, LLC, 2023 WL 5341506, *1 (8th Cir. Aug. 21, 2023). On a direct appeal from the bankruptcy court, the court affirmed the bankruptcy court’s granting of the trustee’s motions to compromise and sell property under Bankruptcy Code §363(f). A creditor had objected, arguing unsuccessfully that “avoidance actions… are not part of the bankruptcy estate ….” Id.