Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Nearly two decades ago, a dispute between J. Alix & Associates and the Executive Office of the United States Trustee (EOUST) over J. Alix's proposed role in two turn-of-the-century restructuring cases (Harnischfeger Industries, Inc. and Safety-Kleen Corp.) led to détente, and a procedure that has generally governed the employment of chief restructuring officers (CRO) in bankruptcy cases since that time.
The "J. Alix Protocol," as it is known, does not have the force of law; rather, it is a set of guidelines by which the UST will not object to retention of a CRO under 11 U.S.C. §363(b), which allows the debtor to enter into transactions "outside the ordinary course of business" with court approval. The compromise struck in the Protocol is the incorporation of certain of the Bankruptcy Code's conflicts of interest, disclosure, and compensation guidelines applicable to case professionals (e.g., attorneys and financial advisors). See, 11 U.S.C. §Section 327(a).
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.