Follow Us

Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Seventh Circuit Takes the Road Less Traveled, and Looks to the Substance of ' 546(e)

In a surprise decision, the Seventh Circuit declined to follow the "plain meaning" approach adopted by other circuit courts, and rejected an opportunity to expand the safe-harbor protections afforded by Bankruptcy Code section 546(e) to protect "securities transactions" in the private market.

X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In a surprise decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit declined to follow the “plain meaning” approach adopted by the Second, Third, Sixth, Eight and Tenth Circuits, and rejected an opportunity to expand the safe-harbor protections afforded by Bankruptcy Code section 546(e) to protect “securities transactions” in the private market where the extent of a financial institution’s involvement is to serve as an intermediary or conduit. FTI Consulting, Inc. v. Merit Management Group, LP, No. 15-3388, 2016 WL 4036408 *6 (7th Cir. July 28, 2016) (“We will not interpret the safe harbor so expansively that it covers any transaction involving securities that uses a financial institution or other named entity as a conduit for funds.”).

This premium content is locked for The Bankruptcy Strategist subscribers only

Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS FOR BANKRUPTCY LAW PRACTITIONERS.
  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • All aspects of bankruptcy law are covered
  • Tap into expert guidance from top bankruptcy lawyers

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Subscribe Now For Unlimited Access

Read These Next