(Artwork by William Hennessy)

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in the Purdue Pharma bankruptcy appeal and, as a result, we might be approaching a mid-2024 “finish line” for an issue that some bankruptcy practitioners, professors, and judges are on the edge of their seats about: Do bankruptcy courts have

Two Christmases ago, we posted about Judge Colleen McMahon‘s (SDNY) 142-page opinion reversing the plan confirmation order in the Purdue Pharma Chapter 11 bankruptcy appeal on the basis that its non-consensual third-party releases were improper under the Bankruptcy Code. Today however, the Second Circuit entered a 97-page opinion (including a concurrence) reversing the District Court’s opinion and affirming the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of the Purdue Pharma plan (and its releases of the Sacklers).

I’ll summarize the high points in this post, with an option of coming back to it.Continue Reading Second Circuit Upholds Third-Party Releases for the Sacklers in Purdue Pharma Bankruptcy Appeal

Late yesterday, Judge Colleen McMahon (SDNY), in a 142-page (!) opinion, reversed the plan confirmation order in the Purdue Pharma Chapter 11 appeal on the basis that its non-consensual third-party releases are improper under the Bankruptcy Code.

As quick background, Purdue Pharma manufactures OxyContin. It sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in September 2019 in response

alliedgold

Back in July, we touched on the doctrine of equitable mootness in the context of a bankruptcy settlement agreement. Last week, the Delaware District Court employed equitable mootness in its opinion dismissing a plan confirmation appeal in the Allied Nevada Gold Corp. bankruptcy. Unless an appellant can raise a valid confirmation appeal before substantial consummation