Now that we’ve recovered from the balmy holidays, survived a record snowstorm in New York, eaten way too many snacks at Super Bowl parties, wished everyone a Happy Year of the Monkey, enjoyed two long weekends, and debated the effects of the passing of Justice Scalia, it’s time to settle back down to business and take the rest of this short week to catch up on what you may have missed in the Weil Bankruptcy Blog so far this year. 

Bankruptcy Code Preempts McCarran-Ferguson Act in Dispute Over Courts’ Jurisdiction

In a chapter 15 decision, In re Daebo International Shipping Co., Judge Michael E.

Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code was introduced more than ten years ago to “to provide effective mechanisms for dealing with cases of cross-border insolvency.”  It incorporates the Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency (the “Model Law”) promulgated by the 

In a recent decision, Quadrant Structured Products v.

As promised in our first post on the Third Circuit’s recent decision on 

In the seemingly never-ending post-Stern quest to elucidate what constitutes a “core” versus “non-core” matter – and exactly what impact that distinction has on the bankruptcy court’s authority to enter a final judgment – the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York recently set out to answer the question of whether a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress properly is cons

For many parents with school-age kids, the month of August marks the end of summer vacation and the start of the new school year, and in this spirit, a post on practice fundamentals seems appropriate.  Specifically, attorneys are responsible for (i) maintaining an accurate address of record to ensure proper service and (ii) monitoring their case docket to avoid missing a deadline.  While this may seem elementary, the recent decision from Judge Teel of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Columbia nonetheless reinforces a point that is particularly applicable to a

We had a dream we’d go trav’lin’ together
We’d spread a little lovin then we’d keep movin’ on
Trav’lin’ along there’s a song that we’re singin’,
C’mon get happy
A whole lotta lovin’ is what we’ll be bringin’,
We’ll make you happy,
We’ll make you happy

(from “C’Mon Get Happy”)

Going, going, gone. Most people might associate those words with fine art, not bankruptcy. But in In re 388 Route 22 Readington Holdings, LLC, the question arose: is value reflected by an active, non-collusive auction, while not dispositive, strong evidence of fair value under section 363(b) of the Bankruptcy Code?

Bankruptcy courts often dismiss appeals of chapter 11 plans when granting the relief requested in the appeal would undermine the finality and reliability of the corresponding plans, a doctrine known as Equitable Mootness. Over the past several years, certain circuits criticized the doctrine for its lack of statutory basis and effect of avoiding review on the merits.¹