Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Update on Bankruptcy Court Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Last month, we reported on two recent Delaware cases that came to opposite conclusions as to whether a bankruptcy court has subject matter jurisdiction over state law claims asserted by a post-confirmation litigation trust: IT Litigation Trust v. D'Aniello, et al. (In re: IT Group, Inc., et al.), ___ B.R. ___, 2005 WL 3050611 (D. Del. Nov. 15, 2005) (IT Group) held that the court had subject matter jurisdiction over such claims, while Shandler v. DLJ Merchant Banking, Inc., et al. (In re Insilco Technologies, Inc.), 330 B.R. 512 (Bankr. D. Del. 2005) (Insilco) held that it did not.
Update
After the article went to press, the Delaware courts weighed in on the subject for the third time in only 3 months. See AstroPower Liquidating Trust v. Xantrex Technology, Inc. et al (In re AstroPower Liquidating Trust), Chapter 11, Adv. No. 06-50876 (Bankr. D. Del. Dec. 22, 2005) (AstroPower). In AstroPower, Chief Judge Walrath held that the court had subject matter jurisdiction over pre-petition claims of breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of agency relationship, even though such claims were commenced for the first time post-confirmation by a liquidation trust. The court distinguished Insilco on the ground that, unlike in that case, the plan and confirmation Order specifically identified this very lawsuit as a claim that was being transferred to the liquidation trust. Slip op. at 26. Thus, the court held that “where, as here, the Plan specifically describes an action over which the court had 'related to' jurisdiction pre-confirmation and expressly provides for the retention of such jurisdiction to liquidate that claim for the benefit of creditors, there is a sufficiently close nexus with the bankruptcy proceeding to support jurisdiction post-confirmation.” Slip op. at 27.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.