Firm: All
Practice Industry: Corporate & Business, Retail & Distribution
Region: All
Country/ State: All
Tag: All
Haynes and Boone, LLP | March 2010

The recent case of Mervyn’s LLC v. Lubert-Adler Group IV, LLC, et al. (In re Mervyn’s Holdings, LLC),1 serves as a warning to sellers and equity firms participating in leveraged buyouts to be wary of the effect such buyouts will have on creditors of the target company ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | March 2010

The current economic climate has led to a dramatic increase in bank failures over the past few years. In 2009 alone, 140 banks failed, compared to 26 bank failures in 2008 and only 3 bank failures in 2007. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) recently announced that it has 702 banks on its “Problem List” as of December 31, 2009, up 27 percent from 552 banks on September 30, 2009 ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | July 2012

On July 9, 2012, the Seventh Circuit decided in Sunbeam1 that the rejection of a trademark license by a bankrupt trademark licensor does not deprive the trademark licensee of its right to continue to use the trademark, and disagreed with the 1985 Fourth Circuit decision in Lubrizol2 that held to the contrary ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | April 2013

On March 26, 2013, in the case of Teed v. Thomas & Betts Power Solutions, L.L.C.,1 the Seventh Circuit, in an opinion written by Judge Posner, joined at least one other circuit court and a multitude of district courts across the country in extending the federal common law standard for evaluating successor liability to suits brought under the Federal Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | July 2011

On June 28, 2011, in In re Enron Creditors Recovery Corp. v. Alfa,1 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that Enron’s redemption of its commercial paper prior to maturity fell within the definition of a “settlement payment” and was protected from avoidance under § 546(e)’s safe harbor provision in Title 11 of the United States Code ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | November 2011

On October 28, 2011, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia issued an opinion in the Chapter 15 case of Qimonda AG (“Qimonda”).1 The bankruptcy court held that the application of § 365(n) to executory licenses to U.S. patents was required to sufficiently protect the interests of U.S ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | March 2010

A new wrinkle in the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy cases emerged recently when a U.S. bankruptcy judge issued an opinion directly at odds with the decisions previously rendered by certain English courts regarding priority of payment provisions (the “Priority Provisions”) with respect to collateral under the “Dante Program ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | January 2013

On January 4, 2013, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division (the “District Court”) issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order1 that seems demonstrably at odds with the majority of cases analyzing the § 546(e) safe harbor provision.2 General Background Facts Sentinel Management Group, Inc ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | September 2014

On August 26, 2014, Judge Robert D. Drain of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York issued a bench ruling in In re MPM Silicones, LLC, Case No. 14-22503 (RDD), on several aspects of the plan of reorganization filed by debtor Momentive Performance Materials, Inc., a specialty chemicals manufacturing company, and its affiliated debtors ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | September 2011

On September 13, 2011, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) unanimously approved a final rule implementing Section 165(d) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Rule”) ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | September 2014

On September 3, 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit entered an opinion vacating various orders of the United States Bankruptcy Court and District Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Bankruptcy Court” and the “District Court”) in the bankruptcy cases of TMT Procurement Corporation and its affiliated debtors (the “Debtors”), including a final order approving the Debtors’ post-petition debtor in possession financing (the “DI

What do you do when you have a safety incident on a job? Are you prepared? This article will focus on some things to consider if you have a safety incident. Assistance The No. 1 priority should be to safely assist anyone that has been injured if you can. Time can be of the essence when safety events occur. You may need to call 911 depending on the circumstances. Do not wait for someone else to call 911. You may need to administer first aid ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | February 2011

In a welcome bit of good news for lenders, U.S. District Court Judge Gold (Southern District of Florida) reversed the portion of the 2009 bankruptcy court decision in the TOUSA, Inc. bankruptcy cases that had ordered the disgorgement of $403 million plus interest based on the holding that the amounts were received by certain lenders to the TOUSA parent in connection with a pre-petition transaction that constituted a fraudulent transfer ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | January 2014

On January 17, 2014 the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware issued a ruling in Fisker Automotive Holdings, Inc., et. al., Case No. 13-13087 (KG), which highlights potential risks to both secured creditors and purchasers of claims in bankruptcy section 363 sales. The facts in Fisker are straightforward ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | March 2013

Bankruptcy Code § 1129(a)(10) provides that in order for a plan proponent to “cram down” - i.e., force acceptance of - a plan of reorganization on a dissenting class of creditors, at least one impaired class of creditors must vote in favor of the plan. Because a plan is often not accepted by all classes entitled to vote, the ability to procure at least one impaired, accepting class in order to cram down a dissenting class is essential in achieving plan confirmation ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | September 2014

On August 15, 2014, the Eleventh Circuit entered a Memorandum Opinion in the Wortley v. Chrispus Venture Capital, LLC case (In re Global Energies, LLC, “Global”)1 unwinding a section 363 sale order entered in 2010 by the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida based on a finding of bad faith in the filing of an involuntary bankruptcy case in 2010 ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | April 2011

Vendors who sell goods to customers are probably familiar with the issues that arise when the customer later files bankruptcy. For instance, Section 546(c) of the Bankruptcy Code (and applicable state law) provides a vendor the right to reclaim goods it sold to the customer within 45 days of the bankruptcy petition date ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | October 2010

On September 30, 2010, in In re American Safety Razor, LLC, et al., Case No. 10-12351 (MFW), the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware ruled that the debtors’ proposed bid procedures for the sale of the business were unfair and unreasonable. The bid procedures, among other things, provided too much discretion to the debtors in the auction process. 363 Sales in General Section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code provides authority to sell a debtor’s assets ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | February 2013

On January 31, 2013, the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware in In re Indianapolis Downs, LLC1declined to designate the votes of parties to a post-petition restructuring support agreement (i.e., a lock-up agreement), instead confirming the Debtors’ Modified Second Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”) based on the votes of such parties ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | October 2010

On October 5, 2010, Judge Bruce Black of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois (the “Bankruptcy Court”) issued a ruling in the River Road Hotel Partner LLC, et. al. (the “Debtors”) bankruptcy cases denying the Debtors’ bid procedures motion incident to plan confirmation. The bid procedures motion, among other things, sought the denial of secured creditor’s right to credit bid ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | February 2010

In a decision that is not surprising, but that should be welcomed by lenders (but perhaps not by borrowers), the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court held in Amcan Holdings, Inc., et al. vs. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, et al., Case No. 603393/07, that a detailed, executed term sheet was not a binding contract to lend. Amcan sought financing from CIBC to finance an acquisition and refinance certain existing debt ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | November 2011

Rejection of a contract in bankruptcy may not always accomplish a debtor’s goal to shed ongoing contractual obligations and liabilities, especially when dealing with employee benefit plans. On October 13, 2011, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals highlighted this issue in its opinion in Evans v. Sterling Chemicals, Inc ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | November 2013

In In re KB Toys,1 a recent decision by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, the Court held that a claim that is disallowable under § 502(d)2 if held by the original claimant is also disallowable in the hands of a purchaser or subsequent transferee ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | November 2010

In an October 19, 2010 opinion arising out of the Scotia Pacific bankruptcy cases, the Fifth Circuit ruled that reorganized Scotia and its affiliate Pacific Lumber Company were obliged – nearly 2½ years after Scotia’s reorganization plan was consummated – to pay Scotia’s former secured lenders approximately $30 million on account of a mistake made by the bankruptcy judge in calculating the amount owed to the secured lenders for the use of their collateral during the bankruptcy cases ...

Haynes and Boone, LLP | August 2011

Bankruptcy Judge Michael Lynn of the Northern District of Texas recently issued a noteworthy opinion in In re Village at Camp Bowie I, L.P. that addresses two important Chapter 11 confirmation issues. Judge Lynn determined that a plan that artificially impaired a class of claims in order to meet the requirements of section 1129(a)(10) had not been proposed in bad faith and did not violate the requirements of section 1129(a) ...

dots