Third-party releases can be an integral part of a chapter 11 bankruptcy case. These releases can have the effect of a nonconsensual resolution of state law claims, and a question exists as to how they are implicated in a Stern v. Marshall analysis.
Committees
A seller of goods who enjoys a casual relationship with a buyer — without adhering to strict documentation and enforcement standards — can find itself in dire straits in the event of that buyer’s insolvency.
In Franchise Servs. of N. Am. v. U.S. Trs. (In re Franchise Servs. of N. Am.),[1] the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, on direct appeal from the U.S.
Editor's Note: ABI's latest video podcast features ABI Deputy Executive Director Amy Quackenboss talking with David R. Kuney of Whiteford Taylor Preston (Washington, D.C.).
When a firm files for bankruptcy, someone loses a financial investment. Whether the filing is chapter 7 or chapter 11, creditors may get only a portion of a return (or none) of their investment, and investors may well lose their entire investment. However, filing for bankruptcy does not mean that a firm goes out of business.
Like their for-profit counterparts, nonprofit corporations face a variety of challenges throughout their corporate life cycles, some of which may lead an organization to pursue reorganization under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code.[1] One of the issues that arises during a nonprofit’s reorganization is whether its board of directors m
A Feb. 27, 2018, decision by the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a split in the circuit courts by clarifying that a bankruptcy trustee, creditors’ committee or other entity with standing may claw back preferences and constructive fraudulent transfers involving the purchase of securities, even though the transaction was effectuated by depositing funds or securities with financial institutions.
What happens to a licensee’s right to use a trademark if the licensor files for bankruptcy?
The permanent release of a nondebtor from a debt owed to a third party in a chapter 11 plan is barred per se in some courts and must meet a high standard to be allowed in others. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado in In re Midway Gold US Inc.
The issue of nonconsensual third-party releases in chapter 11 plans continues to generate litigation. Releases and corresponding injunctions frequently insulate nondebtors — such as directors, officers or parent entities — from claims asserted by other nondebtors. Litigation regarding third-party releases has also involved jurisdictional issues, including those addressed in Stern v.