D&O Policy ‘Bankruptcy Exclusion’ Held To Be an Unenforceable ‘Ipso Facto’ Clause

Read These Next

• 

  Overview of Limitations on Employee Compensation in Bankruptcy

  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.

  Read More ›

• 

  Third Circuit Allows Repossessing Secured Lender to Hold Collateral Pending Bankruptcy Stay

  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.

  Read More ›

• 

  Sympathy for the Debtor? Not When It Comes to Student Loans

  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.

  Read More ›

• 

  ‘Dirt for Debt’ In Bankruptcy Plans of Reorganization

  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.

  Read More ›