Who's doing what in the bankruptcy world.
- April 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
As bankruptcy practitioners awaited the enactment and effective date of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ('BAPCPA'), the multitude of speaking panels, journals, and cocktail conversations offering their speculative commentary on the anticipated effects of the amendments to Title 11 paid increased attention to the proposed amendments' effects on the remedies afforded to creditors under ' 303 of the Bankruptcy Code ' namely the involuntary bankruptcy petition.
April 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Beginning in the fall of 2004, partners in Dallas-based Jenkens & Gilchrist who left the firm also left behind their capital contributions, which in some cases totaled hundreds of thousands of dollars, due to the firm's 'contingent liabilities.'
April 27, 2007Brenda Sapino JeffreysThis article first discusses In re Dana Corp., 351 B.R. 96 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2006)('Dana I'), in which the Southern District of New York bankruptcy court denied a debtor's proposed employee 'incentive' program. The article then highlights the differences between the program proposed in Dana I and the program approved by the Southern District of New York in In re Dana Corp., 2006 WL 3479406 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2006) ('Dana II'). Finally, this article proposes options other than those utilized in the foregoing cases that might be available to bankruptcy practitioners in need of a way to ensure that their clients' top executives do not walk out the door.
April 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |An essential part of the Chapter 11 process is constructive dialogue and negotiation among all stakeholders involved in the bankruptcy case with a view toward building a consensus on the terms of a confirmable Chapter 11 plan. The Bankruptcy Code establishes a framework to promote such interaction by providing for the appointment of official committees of creditors and shareholders entrusted by statute with the duty to participate in the formulation of such a plan.
April 27, 2007Paul D. Leake and Mark G. DouglasWho's doing what; who's moving where.
April 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.
April 27, 2007ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |What happens when the U.S. Supreme Court hands you a loss? As anyone can tell you, this usually signals the end of the road, and defeat must be admitted. Not cowed by such a setback, however, is a Colorado woman on a mission to prevent from happening to anyone else what happened to her when law enforcement authorities refused to protect her children from their murderous father. Although she lost her bid to hold the city of Castle Rock, CO, liable for negligence under U.S. law, she has now gone to an international tribunal.
April 27, 2007Janice G. InmanIn late January, Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP announced that it was hiking its first-year associate pay to $160,000. Since then, the legal press has noted that an increasing number of firms in every major legal market plan to follow suit.
April 27, 2007Susan HackettOther than holding that courts cannot use race as a criterion for decision (Palmore v. Sidoti, the U.S. Supreme Court has not delved deeply into defining the constitutional rights of divorcing parents in the context of a custody dispute. In Shepp v. Shepp, however, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recently held that a divorced parent had a constitutional right to advocate his sincere religious belief in polygamy to his 9-year-old child.
April 27, 2007Andrew Schepard

