Two years ago this week–February 12, 2015 to be exact–Stone & Baxter launched Plan Proponent. 65 blog posts, 48 email subscribers, and almost 13,000 hits later, here we are. In honor of our 2 year anniversary, we figured we’d revisit one of the topics that started it all for our niche blog: the
(The Capitol from the Supreme Court on 12/30/16 via Dave’s iPhone)
Once again from my in-laws’ home in Potomac, Maryland, here’s Plan Proponent’s Best of 2016 post. With our second year in the bag, we’ll dispense with the formalities and get straight to the Top 10, link by link. In honor of our Supreme
Earlier this month, Judge Carey in Delaware weighed in on third-party releases in his opinion confirming the Chapter 11 bankruptcy plan for Abeinsa Holdings, Inc., et al. Back in February, we reviewed Judge Delano’s third-party release decision in HWA Properties, a Middle District of Florida case. In that case, the court refused to permit
Back in April, AOG Entertainment and 40+ of its favorite affiliates (collectively, “Core“) filed Chapter 11 cases in the Southern District of New York. Those cases are best known as encompassing the production companies for the “American Idol” and “So You Think You Can Dance” television shows. Recently, Law360 reported that “American
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
Last month, Judge Laura Grandy, a bankruptcy judge in the Southern District of Illinois, entered confirmation opinion in STC, Inc.’s Chapter 11 case. The opinion is noteworthy for 2 reasons. First, it amounts to an excellent treatise on the Section 1129 confirmation requirements. Second, I’m honored that Judge Grandy cited in her opinion the American
Every once in a while, we encounter a case that forces us to ponder the potential breadth of the bankruptcy discharge. In re Lombard Flats, LLC, a Northern District of California case from March 23, 2016, is such a case. In short, the court held that an alter ego claim against a Chapter 11
One person’s successful confirmation of a plan of reorganization is another person’s bad faith abuse of the rules. Last month in In re The Village at Lakeridge, LLC, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals waded into just such an area: the intersection of claims buying, insider status, and plan voting. Specifically, it addressed whether
One person’s successful confirmation of a plan of reorganization is another person’s bad faith abuse of the rules. Last month in In re The Village at Lakeridge, LLC, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals waded into just such an area: the intersection of claims buying, insider status, and plan voting. Specifically, it addressed whether a non-insider creditor who purchases a claim from an insider is considered an insider for voting purposes. While it is well-settled that an insider’s vote is not counted for confirmation purposes under § 1129(a)(10), it was an open question, at least in the Ninth Circuit, whether insider status follows the insider claim’s in the hands of a non-insider purchaser. This is an important confirmation issue, especially in close cases where every vote matters.
Continue Reading Insider Status Travels With Claim? 9th Circuit Says No
(If as many people who showed up to the 9th Circuit for Prop 8 showed up for the absolute priority rule, then the absolute priority rule might finally get the attention that it deserves from the U.S. Supreme Court!)
Yesterday, in Zachary v. California Bank & Trust, the Ninth Circuit overturned the Ninth Circuit