In re Nance Properties, Inc., Case No. 11-06197- 8-JRL (Bankr. E.D.N.C. Nov. 8, 2011)
CASE SNAPSHOT
Spicer v. Konjoyan (In re Renaissance Hospital, et al.), Adv. No. 10-04190-DML (Bankr. N.D. Texas, Nov. 1, 2011)
CASE SNAPSHOT
On June 28, 2011, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided In re River Road Hotel Partners, LLC v. Amalgamated Bank, 651 F. 3d 642 (7th Cir. 2011). The Court addressed Section 1129 (b)(2)(A) of the United States Bankruptcy Code in connection with a Plan of Reorganization to sell substantially all of the Debtor's assets. The Court held that the indubitable equivalent prong, (i.e., the "cram down" provisions of section 1129(b)(2)(A)(iii)) could not be used to preclude a secured creditor from credit bidding its claim under sections 363(k) and 1129(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Code.
In this memorandum opinion, the Court of Chancery appointed a receiver for an insolvent corporation deadlocked over how to discharge a tax lien.
Yes, on the facts in the Chapter 11 proceedings involving Borders, the insolvent bookseller.
Jefferies & Company, an investment bank, was retained by Borders to pursue reorganisation strategies, including a possible sale of the company’s assets as a going concern. The bank made considerable efforts in flogging the assets, which resulted in an offer from an interested party, but an actual sale of assets did not happen. Jefferies nevertheless claimed the liquidation fee under its agreement with Borders. The company’s creditors opposed this: no sale, no success fee.
As seen in the Spring 2012 issue of West Virginia Banker.
In the wake of the national attention directed towards residential mortgages in the last few years, certain revisions were made to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure to address perceived deficiencies in bankruptcy proofs of claim. The rule changes were first proposed in 2009 by the Judicial Conference of the United States and became effective December 1, 2011.
Relying on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision inAT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that California’s rule against compulsory arbitration of claims for public injunctive relief was preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”). The Court also underscored the key points of an enforceable arbitration clause. Kilgore v. KeyBank (March 7, 2012).
Case Background
TW Telecom Holdings Inc. v. Carolina Internet Ltd., Case No. 11-1068 (10th Cir. Nov. 15, 2011)
CASE SNAPSHOT
The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed its longstanding position, and held that section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code does automatically stay the debtor’s appeal of an action commenced against the debtor prior to the bankruptcy filing, regardless of whether the debtor is the appellant or the appellee. This decision aligns the Tenth Circuit with at least nine other circuits.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In re Village at Camp Bowie I, L.P., 454 B.R. 702 (Bankr. N.D. Texas, 2011)
CASE SNAPSHOT