Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Since the passage of the Bankruptcy Act of 1898, and particularly since 1926, United States bankruptcy laws have contained a provision that would penalize debtors who use false pretenses or false financial documents to obtain credit. The Supreme Court’s decision in Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. Appling, 138 S. Ct. 1752, 201 L. Ed. 2d 102 (2018) (Lamar, Archer) has significantly constricted the range and nature of statements that will support a successful objection by a creditor to the discharge of a debt that was obtained by the statements in question. This constriction could have a very real impact on how entities that loan money or provide services on credit review and collect information regarding a borrower’s creditworthiness.
By Michael L. Cook
“A … transferee [who] received fraudulent transfers with actual knowledge or inquiry notice of fraud or insolvency” loses any “good faith” defense available under the Texas version of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (TUFTA), held the Fifth Circuit in Janvey v. GMAG, LLC
By Matthew Gold
It has been nearly two years since the Supreme Court upended the world of the Bankruptcy Code securities safe harbor with its decision in Merit Management Group, LP v. FTI Consulting, Inc.. For all of the speculation regarding its consequences, there have been few subsequent lower court decisions applying Merit Management, however those cases provide valuable guidance to practitioners facing safe harbor litigation as well as transactional lawyers looking to take advantage of safe harbor protections.
By Albena Petrakov
With the recent carnage in the retail industry, a lot of attention goes to the fate of landlords when their tenants seek bankruptcy protection. A recent case that brings balance is Revel AC Inc. v. IDEA Boardwalk, LLC.
By Paul A. Rubin and Hanh V. Huynh
Employees of a troubled company who stay on as consultants to assist in liquidating its assets or preparing the company for a bankruptcy filing may later be disappointed to face claims to claw back their prepetition compensation.