Though often overlooked, bankruptcy sales can be a real boon to businesses looking for a great deal. Prospective purchasers must, of course, interface with the bankruptcy court, so these companies must understand the lay of the land when looking for a bargain. For example, in the last two years, Wanxiang Group purchased 

Almost every significant bankruptcy case eventually involves preference demands and litigation. Around this abundance of litigation developed a significant body of jurisprudence, to which Judge Sean Lane of the Southern District of New York Bankruptcy Court recently added in clarifying the ordinary course of business preference defense.

In re Trinity Coal Corp., 514 B.R. 526 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. 2014) –

The debtors sought to reject easement and disposal agreements with the owners of adjacent coal mines. The adjacent owners objected on the basis that the agreements were an integral part of a larger transaction, and could not be separately rejected.

When evaluating a debtor’s bankruptcy or restructuring options, determining how to increase or preserve the debtor’s liquidity is crucial to the analysis. Well-advised debtors with significant labor liabilities will need to explore whether attaining cost savings through rejection of their collective bargaining agreements is a viable alternative.

On September 4, 2014, the receivership court for the Reliance Insurance Company (“Reliance’) estate (the “Reliance Estate”) approved a settlement agreement allowing the Liquidator to terminate and commute the obligations between Odyssey and Reliance under the reinsurance agreements.

In a decision that will have profound implications for insolvency professionals of all types, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision that Section 330 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code does not allow applicants to seek compensation in connection with successful defenses to objections to fee applications.

In July of this year, the State Corporation Commission of the Commonwealth of Virginia issued an Order declaring Southern Title Insurance Company insolvent and ordering its liquidation.

The question “Where’s the Beef?” is typically associated with the famous Wendy’s television commercial from 1984 and its lovable actress, Clara Peller. But the recent decision in the chapter 7 case of a national meat processor had an avoidance action defendant asking, “Where’s the Beef … (with me)?” after the debtor’s chapter 7 trustee attempted to avoid over $5 million in transfers made by the debtor to the defendant prepetition.

This is the second of two posts on Saracheck v. Crown Heights House of Glatt, Inc., a recent decision from the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Iowa regarding an avoidance action against food distributor, Crown Heights House of Glatt, Inc.

In recent cases where lawyers have signed proofs of claim for their clients and litigation ensued, the signing attorneys were deposed with respect to the facts surrounding submission of the claims.  For some time, an attorney who signed a proof of claim on his client’s behalf has been risking disqualification or being called as a fact witness concerning the factual basis for the claim in related litigation.