Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett and Bank of America, N.A. v.

As our loyal readers know, the Weil Bankruptcy Blog is running a series of posts discussing the various interesting topics covered in the American Bankruptcy Institute Commission to Study the Refo

Businesses with a global footprint require agile, sophisticated counsel possessing in-depth knowledge of the international aspects of bankruptcy and restructuring. The bankruptcy court 

As previously discussed here and 

Although the bankruptcy world has long been acquainted with Ponzi schemes, the courts have not clearly answered the question of how to distribute investors’ funds after a scheme fails – especially in the scenario where certain investors profit. The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Utah recently weighed in on the issue in 

This article has been contributed to the blog by Caitlin Fell and Mary Angela Rowe. Caitlin Fell is an Associate in the Insolvency & Restructuring group of Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP.

This article has been contributed to the blog by Dave Rosenblat and Mary Angela Rowe.

Bankruptcy courts typically rely on three valuation methods to determine a debtor’s enterprise value: comparable company analysis, precedent transaction analysis, and discounted cash flow analysis.

In a unanimous decision, the New York Court of Appeals stuck a dagger through the heart of bankruptcy estates of failed law firms as it declared that profits earned on matters that former partners of the failed firm take with them to their new employers are not property of the former firm.  Those profits belong to the new firm that provides the legal services.

Readers may recall that, according to at least one bankruptcy court, chapter 9 debtors are not required to obtain bankruptcy court approval of compromises and settlements.