Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, 200 L.Ed.2d 218 (U.S. 2018), the U.S. Supreme Court laid out the standard of review for appellate courts to apply when reviewing a bankruptcy court’s determination of a “mixed question” of law and fact. No doubt the decision provides valuable guidance for the lower courts and practitioners, but resolution of this technical procedural issue has garnered little excitement: as one commentator put it, the majority opinion authored by Justice Kagan represents “the smallest change in the law of any opinion the Supreme Court hand[ed] down this year.” Ronald Mann, Opinion Analysis: Justices Approve Deferential Review of Bankruptcy-Court Determinations on “Insider” Status, SCOTUSblog (Mar. 5, 2018, 4:34 PM).
By Carl E. Black and Jonathan Noble Edel
Recognizing the potential consequences, companies in Chapter 11 bankruptcy often try to reduce employee uncertainty by seeking authority from the bankruptcy court. The Bankruptcy Code, however, imposes a variety of limitations on the ability of a debtor-employer to provide certain types of compensation and benefits to “insiders,” a term that is broadly defined in the Bankruptcy Code.
By Michael L. Cook
“[A] secured creditor [has no] affirmative obligation under the automatic stay to return a debtor’s [repossessed] collateral to the bankruptcy estate immediately upon notice of the debtor’s bankruptcy,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held on Oct. 28, 2019 in In re Denby-Peterson.
By Rudolph J. Di Massa Jr. and Jarret P. Hitchings
The assumption that bankruptcy can’t relieve a borrower of student loan obligations is incorrect, however a debtor must provide compelling evidence that an undue hardship will result if the debtor is required to repay the loan.
By Peter Janovsky
A debtor’s goal in a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy is to confirm a “plan of reorganization.” Creditors usually have the right to vote for or against a plan, and in some cases, a plan can be confirmed over the objection of one or more classes of creditors. This is called a “cram-down.” The Bankruptcy Code’s rules governing cram-down are complex and differ for secured and unsecured classes of creditors. This article shows how bankruptcy courts have ruled on a particular method of cram-down known as a “dirt-for-debt” plan.