Introduction

On Friday, the Nevada Financial Institutions Division closed Sun West Bank, headquartered in Law Vegas, Nevada, and appointed the FDIC as receiver. As receiver, the FDIC entered into a purchase and assumption agreement with City National Bank, headquartered in Los Angeles, California, to assume all of the deposits of the failed bank.

Judge John Koeltl in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently denied a motion to dismiss a securities class action arising, in part, from the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy filing.

In a world replete with a commerce-crippling volcano, disastrous earthquakes, ever-rising taxes and ever-falling property values, its easy to push aside the pink elephant in the room—unfunded public employee pension funds.

Scenario:

On May 17, the FDIC issued a proposed rule that would require certain insured depository institutions to submit a contingent resolution plan outlining how they could be separated from their parent structures and wound down in an orderly and timely manner. Institutions with assets greater than $10 billion that are subsidiaries of a holding company with total assets of more than $100 billion would be subject to this proposal.

On April 23, the FDIC published additional Q&As on the Statement of Policy on Qualifications for Failed Bank Acquisitions (“Policy Statement”) issued in September 2009. The Q&As clarify that there is no requirement that investors must have held their ownership for a specific amount of time.

The FDIC voted to extend the safe harbor provided under 12 C.F.R. § 360.6 until September 30, 2010, from the FDIC’s ability, as conservator or receiver, to recover assets securitized or participated out by an insured depository institution. When the safe harbor was initially adopted in 2000, the FDIC provided important protections for securitizations and participations by confirming that, in the event of a bank failure, the FDIC would not try to reclaim loans transferred into such transactions so long as an accounting sale had occurred.

IN RE: SOUTH BEACH SECURITIES (May 19, 2010)

Many landlords are very familiar with provisions of the United States Bankruptcy Code dealing with assumption and rejection of leases. However, the particular consequences of lease rejection may not be as well known. For example, once a lease is rejected or deemed to be rejected, a landlord may not know its rights with respect to regaining possession of the leased premises. A recent case from a Florida bankruptcy court shed some light on this issue when it held that after a debtor has rejected a lease, the tenant must surrender the premises to the landlord.