A ruling tossing OxyContin maker Purdue Pharma's bankruptcy settlement could tee up a new issue for the U.S. Supreme Court and spur other judges to more closely scrutinize non-debtor releases, a controversial mechanism that shields third parties in Chapter 11 proceedings from liability.
Recent cases show that appellate courts continue to wrestle with standing, jurisdiction, mootness, excusable neglect and finality, among other things. The following overview, in a series of installments, shows what the courts have been addressing during just the past three years. This first installment will cover appellate standing.
In a recent case from the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, In re Paragon Offshore PLC, the bankruptcy court provided guidance on whether a post-plan effective date litigation trust's distributions constituted disbursements subject to the U.S. Trustee fee "tax."
'Purdue Pharma' Looms Although four cases presenting important bankruptcy issues were teed up for the Supreme Court's consideration this term, the Court denied certiorari for each. Each of these petitions involve splits among the circuit courts of appeals, influencing choice of venue and the extent to which bankruptcy decisions are subject to meaningful appeal.
Attorneys general from 41 states, along with Puerto Rico and Guam, have issued a statement in support of legislation before Congress geared toward stopping corporations from venue-shopping bankruptcy cases.
After a year filled with filings, commercial Chapter 11 bankruptcies fell off a cliff in 2021, causing bankruptcy lawyers to work on out-of-court restructurings or pivot to practices with overlapping skills such as real estate and commercial litigation.
A Chapter 11 corporate debtor's monetary penalty obligation owed to the FCC, resulting from "fraud on consumers," survived the debtor's reorganization plan discharge, even when the FCC "was not a victim of the fraud," the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York recently held.
A supplier's receipt of payment under a critical vendor order does not bar the debtor or trustee from pursuing a preference claim to recover amounts paid prepetition to the vendor, according to a recent ruling from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico recently ruled that any attempt to avoid preferential or fraudulent transfers must be supported by evidence that the avoidance will benefit the debtor's estate and the debtor's creditors — not just the debtor itself.
A bankruptcy filing allows Johnson & Johnson to shift legal liability over its talc-based baby powder into a potential $2 billion compensation program for cancer victims, but not without a big fight from the plaintiffs bar.
