Automotive sales in North America continue to climb, and many suppliers are prospering. However, there are some companies who are struggling and who may face bankruptcy. We have seen companies such as A123 Systems and certain subsidiaries of Revstone Industries recently file for protection under the Bankruptcy Code. How can a supplier to a troubled company protect itself? Must a supplier continue to supply on credit terms? The Uniform Commercial Code may assist such a supplier in this situation.

Section 503(b)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code, which was added to the Code pursuant to the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Ace of 2005 ("BAPCPA"), creates an administrative claim in favor of pre-petition suppliers of goods under certain circumstances. From the time of its enactment, courts and practitioners have sought clarity regarding the correct interpretation of key elements of this section of the Code. This article examines the concept of the date of "receipt" of goods for purposes of §503(b)(9).

Crews v. TD Bank, N.A. (In re Crews), 477 B.R. 835 (Bankr. M.D.Fla. 2012) –

A mortgaged building was destroyed by fire prior to the mortgagor’s bankruptcy filing.  In an earlier opinion the bankruptcy court held in that the mortgagee had an equitable lien on the fire insurance proceeds of $350,000.  This opinion addresses the debtors’ attempt to avoid the equitable lien using their “strong arm” powers.

In its recent decision in Valley Bank and Trust Company v. Spectrum Scan, LLC (In re Tracy Broadcasting Corp.), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit overturned lower court decisions that were casting serious doubt on a lender’s ability to realize value from its security interest in the proceeds of FCC broadcast licenses.  This alert will briefly describe the law governing security interests in FCC broadcast licenses, as well as the issues created by the lower courts – and ultimately resolved by the appeals court - in the Tracy case.

How can a professional ensure payment for services appropriately and professionally performed, even in the face of the client’s bankruptcy filing?  Professionals considering representing a client in potential financial distress, in particular, will be interested in this discussion of the professional retainer, who owns it and when, and how to hold onto it.

Retainers Are Property of the Client

In a fairly controversial decision from January 2012, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of Illinois held that a financing statement must contain the “legal” name of an individual as it appears on the individual’s birth certificate. Miller v. State Bank of Arthur (In re Miller), Adv. P. No. 11-9055 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. Jan. 6, 2012). On appeal, the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois reversed and held that the Uniform Commercial Code requires only that a “correct” name appear on the financing statement.

Grogan v. Harvest Capital Co. (In re Grogan), 476 B.R. 270 (Bankr. D. Or. 2012) –

In Grogan, the debtors planted and harvested Christmas trees.  The bankruptcy court was called upon to determine whether the debtors could exercise their “strong arm” powers under Section 544(a) of the Bankruptcy Code to trump the liens of two of their lenders on the Christmas trees.

Disgruntled debtors seeking to evade their obligations by filing fraudulent liens soon face new threats under Illinois law. On July 25, 2012, Governor Patrick Quinn approved and signed Senate Bill 1692, which is intended to provide additional remedies for wrongfully filed UCC liens^.5 Senate Bill 1692 becomes effective January 1, 2013 and will be incorporated into section nine of the Illinois Uniform Commercial Code. 

Perfection of security interests in intellectual property can be a trap for the unwary.  In general, secured parties are often confused about where to file in order to perfect a security interest.  This is not surprising as the perfection regime differs depending on the type of intellectual property.  As a starting point, one should determine the general rule for the main classes of intellectual property:  trademarks, patents and copyrights.

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Michigan recently held in a published opinion that no statutory or common law landlord’s lien exists under Michigan law. Rather, in order for a landlord to assert a valid lien on the personal property of its tenant, the tenant must have consensually agreed to grant a security interest in the property and the landlord must have perfected such interest in accordance with Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. In re Kentwood Pharmacy, LLC, ___ B.R. ___, 2012 WL 2899383 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. July 17, 2012).