Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
No sector is receiving more press about the impact of the rapid rise in interest rates than the commercial real estate industry. It seems like every day there is another article about the billions — or trillions — of dollars in debt that will mature over the next 24 months, secured by interests in real estate. For many properties, the owners’ equity has been wiped out, and the lenders will be left to exercise rights to foreclose their collateral. An interim step in this process is often the appointment of a receiver to operate and or preserve the property during the foreclosure process. Many clients are not aware that the Bankruptcy Code provides that, upon the filing of a bankruptcy case, the receiver is required to give back possession of the mortgaged property to the debtor unless the lender obtains an order from the Bankruptcy Court excusing the receiver from this requirement. And most of the time, the lender does not want possession returned to the debtor that defaulted under the loan. So when can a receiver be excused from this requirement?
Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.
Appellate Courts Skeptical About Bankruptcy Court Sanctions
By Michael L. Cook
Recent appellate decisions reflect a distaste for appeals from bankruptcy court sanction orders. A split Fourth Circuit even refused to hear such an appeal. Other courts tend to limit sanctions or, alternatively, accept a bankruptcy judge’s findings under a stringent “abuse of discretion” standard.
Supreme Court’s Rejection of Purdue Pharma Settlement Redefines Releases In Chapter 11
By Angelo Castaldi
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued its most anticipated bankruptcy decision in recent memory. In a 5-4 decision entered June 27, the Supreme Court struck down the nonconsensual third-party releases. Writing for the Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch ruled that nothing in the Bankruptcy Code authorized the nonconsensual release or discharge of claims of opioid victims against the Sacklers, who were not debtors themselves.
Ninth Circuit: Debt In Asset Case Is Nondischargeable If Debtor Fails to Properly Schedule the Debt
By Lawrence J. Kotler and Geoffrey A. Heaton
In a recent published decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed a previously unresolved question in that circuit: whether a debtor’s failure to properly schedule a debt in an “asset case” renders the debt nondischargeable.
Is the Rule Preventing Bankruptcy Judges from Appointing Special Masters Outdated?
By Mark B. Conlan and Noel L. Hillman
Rule 9031 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure prevents all bankruptcy judges, and, if broadly interpreted, any federal judge hearing bankruptcy cases and proceedings, from appointing special masters. The rule has not been amended since its adoption in 1983. It is outdated and should be repealed or amended to accord with the reality of today’s complex Chapter 11 cases.