Is anyone ready for a test on bankruptcy appellate jurisdiction?  For the second time in a week, the Sixth Circuit addressed its appellate jurisdiction in bankruptcy appeals, this time in the context of orders denying the substantive consolidation of two separate chapter 7 bankruptcy estates, In re Cyberco Holdings and Teleservices Group.   On the heels of its decision in Lindsey v.

LightSquared, the satellite-terrestrial venture backed by Phil Falcone, continues to push for a spectrum solution that the FCC will accept.  On Aug.

I. Introduction

Former shareholders in leveraged buyouts may be sued by the estate representative or by creditors to recover funds paid to them for their shares as fraudulent transfers under federal or state law if the debtor subsequently files for bankruptcy.

CASE RESULTS DEPEND UPON A VARIETY OF FACTORS UNIQUE TO EACH CASE AND DO NOT GUARANTEE OR PREDICT A SIMILAR RESULT IN ANY FUTURE CASE

The Bottom Line

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held on July 30, 2013, that a reorganized Chapter 11 debtor could reopen its closed case, enabling the debtor assignee to enforce a purchase option in a real property lease despite the lease’s “anti-assignment provisions.” In re Lazy Days’ RV Center Inc., 2013 WL 3886735, *5 (3d Cir. July 30, 2013).

California Courts have discretion to award attorneys’ fees to a prevailing defendant in a trade secrets action where the commencement or continued prosecution of a trade secrets action is in bad faith. We have blogged about this issue twice previously.

The First Circuit Court of Appeals has recently held in Sun Capital Partners III, LP v. New England Teamsters & Trucking Industry Pension Fund, No. 12-2312 (July 24, 2013), a case of first impression at the Circuit Court level, that a private equity fund that exercises sufficient control over a portfolio company may be considered a “trade or business” for purposes of Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA).