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
Insider Status Travels With Claim? 9th Circuit Says No
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
Ninth Circuit Follows the Lead on Absolute Priority Rule
(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
Zero Times Something is Still Zero: Adapting Till to Unsecured Creditors
(click the picture to log into ABI and read the Jan. 2016 edition)
We’d like to take a quick moment and plug shamelessly an article that I co-wrote with Richard Gaudet of HDH Advisors, LLC. Our firm does a lot of business with Richard and his group, and he was nice enough to ask
Happy New Year: The Best of 2015
(As is my favorite New Year’s tradition, we’re in DC, but will watch it on TV!)
It’s that obligatory time of the year for “Year in Review” posts and the like. We’re also closing Plan Proponent’s inaugural year. Therefore, from my makeshift office at my in-laws’ home in Potomac, Maryland, here’s our “Best of
“Traps for the Unwary”: § 1129(e) and “Small Business Debtors”
In today’s post, we’ll shift away from the big Delaware cases and focus on a critical “small business debtor” Chapter 11 provision. Over the past 6 years, our firm hasn’t filed many small business cases, mostly because many of our debtors were real estate debtors and, thus, definitionally excluded from the small business category. However,
Revisiting § 1129(a)(7)’s “Best Interests of Creditors Test”
(Indian guest workers protesting alleged human trafficking by Signal International)
Last week, Judge Walrath, a Delaware bankruptcy judge, entered her order confirming the Plan of Liquidation in the Signal International, Inc. Chapter 11. For the backstory on Signal’s July 12, 2015 filing, the Morris James Delaware Business Bankruptcy Report has you covered. The
Loss of Priority Status by § 507(a)(8) Tax Claim Buyers
Claims trading is a thriving cottage industry in bankruptcy cases. By some accounts, it’s a $40B+ business. While we generally anticipate seeing general unsecured claims purchased (whether for strategic reasons related to plan confirmation or economic bets), we’ve seen an increase in purchases of § 507(a)(8) priority tax claims (especially ad valorem tax claims and
Supreme Court Weighs-In on the Finality of Confirmation Orders (Part 2)
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank.
In Part 1, we summarized the decision. Here in Part 2, we’ll provide some humble criticism.
As a recap, the Supreme Court held that, unlike a confirmation or dismissal, an order denying confirmation of
Supreme Court Weighs-In on the Finality of Confirmation Orders (Part 1)
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank and, in the process, likely resolved a Circuit split on an important bankruptcy confirmation issue: Is an order denying confirmation of a bankruptcy plan “final” and, thus, immediately appealable? Siding with the majority view, Chief Justice