Collecting Support from a Payor Who Has Filed Under Chapter 11
Matrimonial attorneys may believe that the Bankruptcy Code protects support creditors, insuring that they will be able to collect both ongoing support and support arrears. While it may be true that the support obligations cannot be discharged, during the pendency of a Chapter 11 case ' and that could be for years ' collection of support is increasingly a matter of federal law to be adjudicated by a federal court that is concerned with balancing the claims of the support creditor against the claims of all the other creditors.
What Constitutes a Health Care Business Under 11 U.S.C. ' 333?
The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ('BAPCPA') was initially enacted to reform the Bankruptcy Code as it relates to health care businesses and to protect the ongoing quality of patient care being provided by such health care establishments during a bankruptcy proceeding. Specifically, this legislation added Section 333 to the United States Code Title 11, which requires the appointment of a patient care ombudsman ('PCO') in Chapters 7, 9 or 11 reorganization cases where the debtor is a 'health care business,' as defined by the Code, unless the court finds the appointment is not necessary to protect the health and well-being of the business' patients.
Foreclosure and Receivers in the Current Liquidity Crisis
Given the instability in the current real estate market and the significant rise in the number of borrowers defaulting on their mortgages, the topic of foreclosures, regardless of the type, will be the subject of many future discussions and articles. Just a quick review of popular business periodicals reveals the many forces working together to both increase the number of foreclosures and decrease property values. In this climate, many lenders will be assessing their options when it comes to foreclosing on delinquent borrowers.
Enron Redux
Featured prominently in business and financial headlines in late 2005 and early 2006 were a pair of highly controversial rulings handed down by the New York bankruptcy court overseeing the Chapter 11 cases of embattled energy broker Enron Corporation and its affiliates. Now, in a carefully reasoned 53-page opinion, District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin recently vacated both of the controversial rulings. <i>In re Enron Corp.</i>, 2007 WL 2446498 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2007).
Exploring the Outer Limits of ' 363(f) Clearance
Bankruptcy offers an attractive platform for the sale of assets because it is injected with a statutory prerogative allowing for the clearance of third- party interests. Specifically, ' 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code permits the sale of bankruptcy estate property 'free and clear of any interest [of any other entity] in such property' provided that certain conditions are satisfied. Notwithstanding that grant of authority, however, the Bankruptcy Code does not specifically define the phrase 'any interest in such property' or otherwise specify the scope of interests that the phrase is intended to cover.
The Gavel Falls
The use of bankruptcy to protect an individual's home from foreclosure is sufficiently commonplace that practitioners would be well advised to understand the foreclosure process in their state and, in particular, when that process will be deemed completed for purposes of section 1322. This article explains why.
Riding the Fulcrum Seesaw
Troubled businesses also may have turned to the distressed debt market instead of filing for bankruptcy protection due to recent changes to the Bankruptcy Code, which made bankruptcy a more complicated, expensive and uncertain alternative. As a result, when the next wave of Chapter 11 filings comes, hedge funds and other distressed debt investors will act to protect their unique interests and strategies, which will bring new dynamics to bankruptcy cases.
The Supreme Court Speaks in Marrama
With its Feb. 21, 2007 holding in <i>Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Massachusetts</i>, 127 S. Ct. 1105 (2007), the Supreme Court stepped in to resolve a Circuit Court split concerning a debtor's right to convert a Chapter 7 case to a Chapter 13 case under the Bankruptcy Code, pursuant to ' 706(a) of the Code. On its face, ' 706(a) seems clear ' a debtor has an absolute, one-time right to conversion. Such clarity is, in the Supreme Court's view, hazy at best.
