Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In a recent, unanimous opinion authored by Justice Ginsburg, the United States Supreme Court affirmed lower court decisions holding that a bankruptcy court order denying a motion for relief from the automatic stay constitutes a final order that must be appealed within the time provided under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002. Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC, 598 U.S. ___ (2020). As a result, creditors and other parties in interest now must carefully assess, even more so than before, if and when to file in the bankruptcy court a motion for relief from the automatic stay given the finality and ensuing consequences of an adverse ruling.
*May exclude premium content
By Michael L. Cook
High Court Rejects Application of Bob Roberts Rule
Federal courts should “turn to state law to resolve” a “fight over a tax refund,” held a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in Rodriquez v. FDIC (In re United W Bancorp., Inc.)
By Lidia Dinkova
Potential Clients Are Reaching Out to Bankruptcy Attorneys to Assess the Need for Business Filings
Bankruptcy attorneys expected to get calls as the coronavirus pandemic swiftly slowed the economy — and they were right.
By Carlos J. Cuevas
This article examines asset protection and pre-bankruptcy planning and its impact on a debtor’s discharge through Bankruptcy Code §727(a)(2)(A).
By Steve Werth
One of the provisions of the Small Business Reorganization Act amends the language of Bankruptcy Code Section 547 — which gives trustees and debtors in possession the right to seek to recover a payment to a third party in the 90-day period prior to the commencement of a bankruptcy case as a “preference” — to add a due diligence requirement. Though the intent behind the added language seems clear, it may not have its intended effect.