Help Center

Annual Spring Meeting | April 11-14 | Washington, D.C. Register Today View Schedule

ABI Blog Exchange

  In high school, my English teacher tasked me with memorizing and reciting a monologue from Shakespeare’s famous "Scottish Play", Macbeth. The monologue – the title character delivered it -- came from Act V, Scene 5, after Lady Macbeth’s own guilt catches up with her and takes her own life.  Although I sometimes confuse my own children’s names, I can still recall – and spout out instantly -- the lines I memorized and recited in front of the class some 42 years ago:                Tomorrow, tomorrow and tomorrow                Creeps in this petty pace from day to day                To the last syllable of recorded time                And all our yesterdays have lighted fools                The way to dusty death                Out, out brief candle!                Life is but a walking shadow,                A poor player who struts and frets     His hour upon the stage                And then is heard no more.     It is a tale told by an idiot                Full of sound and fury                Signifying nothing. The last half of the speech well prepared me to be a lawyer. There is much sound and fury (some of it from me), and much of it does signify very little, if anything at all. I have also heard many tales told by people of questionable intelligence, and I have often felt that I am a “poor player” emoting uselessly in a courtroom for my allotted time. That monologue also sometimes applies to describe decisions from higher courts. Take the case of Louis B.
4 years 10 months ago
As noted in several press reports, Pershing Square’s recent SEC filing of a preliminary proxy statement related to Allergen is an unusual maneuver in its efforts to cause a merger of the company with Valeant Pharmaceutical.   
4 years 10 months ago
There are times when a person may be found to owe another person money.  Usually one party sues […] The post Facing a Collection of a Judgment appeared first on LakeLaw.

Read More from: Lake Law Blog

4 years 10 months ago
There are times when a person may be found to owe another person money.  Usually one party sues […] The post Facing a Collection of a Judgment appeared first on LakeLaw.

Read More from: Lake Law Blog

4 years 10 months ago
There are times when a person may be found to owe another person money.  Usually one party sues […] The post Facing a Collection of a Judgment appeared first on LakeLaw.

Read More from: Lake Law Blog

4 years 10 months ago
The first thing someone researching chapter 13 learns is that, fundamentally, it’s a payment plan. Someone seeking chapter […] The post Payment Plan for Chapter 13 appeared first on LakeLaw.

Read More from: Lake Law Blog

4 years 10 months ago
The first thing someone researching chapter 13 learns is that, fundamentally, it’s a payment plan. Someone seeking chapter […] The post Payment Plan for Chapter 13 appeared first on LakeLaw.

Read More from: Lake Law Blog

4 years 10 months ago
The first thing someone researching chapter 13 learns is that, fundamentally, it’s a payment plan. Someone seeking chapter […] The post Payment Plan for Chapter 13 appeared first on LakeLaw.

Read More from: Lake Law Blog

4 years 10 months ago
Yesterday, without explanation, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied the National Association of Manufacturers’ emergency motion to stay the effectiveness of the SEC conflict minerals rules.   
4 years 10 months ago
Posted by Kathy Bazoian PhelpsAs reported in The Ponzi Scheme Blog, the Supreme Court recently issued an important decision further defining the boundaries of SLUSA – the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998. Chadbourne & Park LLP v. Troice, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 1644 (Feb. 26, 2014). Two new decisions attempt to interpret and apply Troice in other Ponzi scheme cases.In Troice, the Court determined that a class action could proceed against two law firms, an insurance brokerage firm, and a financial services firm for their alleged assistance to R. Allen Stanford and Stanford Financial in connection with Stanford’s multi-billion Ponzi scheme.

Read More from: The Ponzi Blog

4 years 10 months ago
One of the most interesting, and at times vexing, issues that arises in bankruptcy proceedings involves the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy courts. In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in with its noteworthy decision in Stern v. Marshall, in which it held that bankruptcy courts lack the constitutional authority to enter a final judgment on a state law counterclaim that is not related to the bankruptcy proceeding. Since Stern, a number of cases have been published - at both the bankruptcy court and court of appeals level - where Stern jurisdictional issues have been raised and adjudicated. Read More › Tags: 6th Circuit Court of Appeals

Read More from: Michigan Bankruptcy Blog

4 years 10 months ago
The Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) has taken the novel approach of filing a letter with the SEC Directors at the Division of Enforcement and the Division of Corporation Finance, alleging that Dominion Midstream, a Dominion Resources affiliate, did not provide sufficient information about several environmental and related risks surrounding its Dominion Cove Point LNG Terminal export project in its registration statement filed with the SEC offering its limited partnership interests. The offering has not yet occurred. Betty Moy Huber, co-head of Davis Polk’s Environmental Group, guides us through these unique proceedings and the possible implications.
4 years 10 months ago
The Bankruptcy Code impairs lenders’ rights in various ways.  Accordingly, lenders have long attempted to devise methods of preventing borrowers from filing for bankruptcy protection.  Such attempts generally have not been successful -- courts hold that as a general matter, a borrower’s pre bankruptcy waiver of the right to file bankruptcy is against public policy and is void.  See, e.g., Klingman v. Levinson,831 F.2d 1292, 1296 n.3 (7th Cir. 1987) (“For public policy reasons, a debtor may not contract away the right to a discharge in bankruptcy.”).  Courts have rejected such waiver provisions in many forms.  See, e.g., In re Madison, 184 B.R. 686, 688 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1995) (refusing to enforce debtor’s oral bankruptcy waiver made on the record in prior bankruptcy case); In re Tru Block Concrete Prods. Inc., 27 B.R. 486, 492 (Bankr. S.D. Cal. 1983) (refusing to enforce bankruptcy waiver provision in forbearance agreement); In re Peli, 31 B.R. 952, 956 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 1983) (refusing to enforce bankruptcy waiver provision in personal injury settlement agreement).    

Read More from: Creditors' Rights

4 years 10 months ago
A coalition of proxy advisory firms, including ISS and Glass Lewis, is disputing the requirements in the proposed EU revisions to the Shareholder Rights Directive related to their services, which could take effect in all EU member states. The proposal focuses on many of the same criticisms that US companies have about the advisors, although we are unlikely to see regulatory action in the near term in the US.
4 years 10 months ago
In addition to their full-time jobs, many individuals have their own “side businesses” which generate some income but not enough to enable them to give up their “day job.”  Many of these side businesses require assets in order for the individual to deliver the goods or services to his customers.  When that individual has to file for bankruptcy, may he or she claim a “tools of the trade” exemption in the assets used in the side business?  The Tenth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel in held a debtor may assert such an exemption in appropriate circumstances, in its decision in Larson v. Sharp (In re Sharp), 2014 WL 1400073 (10th Cir. BAP April 11, 2014).

Read More from: Creditors' Rights

4 years 10 months ago
The inclusion of pre-bankruptcy waivers in “standard issue” credit documents has generated a host of litigation in bankruptcy cases about the enforceability of such provisions. While certain waivers among creditor classes have been called “safe” (e.g., a junior creditor waiving the right to object to actions by a more senior creditor), bankruptcy courts have generally balked at upholding waivers by a debtor of fundamental bankruptcy rights, such as the right to commence a chapter 11 case. The usual rationale cited for striking down such provisions is that they violate public policy and prevent the orderly reorganization that Chapter 11 is designed to foster. 

Read More from: Basis Points

4 years 10 months ago
The inclusion of pre-bankruptcy waivers in “standard issue” credit documents has generated a host of litigation in bankruptcy cases about the enforceability of such provisions. While certain waivers among creditor classes have been called “safe” (e.g., a junior creditor waiving the right to object to actions by a more senior creditor), bankruptcy courts have generally balked at upholding waivers by a debtor of fundamental bankruptcy rights, such as the right to commence a chapter 11 case. The usual rationale cited for striking down such provisions is that they violate public policy and prevent the orderly reorganization that Chapter 11 is designed to foster. 

Read More from: Basis Points

4 years 10 months ago
In a recent speech to the Council of Institutional Investors, SEC Commissioner Kara Stein expressed her support for CII’s rulemaking petition seeking universal proxy ballots for proxy contests, analogizing it to the “basic rights of an owner of a company…to fire an employee.” A universal ballot would allow a shareholder to mix and match the company’s nominees and the dissident’s nominees on one ballot without attending the meeting.
4 years 10 months ago
By:  Justin A. Saporito The  Riverhounds Event Center, L.P. and Riverhounds Acquisition Group, L.P., the limited partnerships that own and operate Highmark Stadium and the Pittsburgh Riverhounds Professional Soccer Club respectively,  jointly declared voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 26, 2014.  Debtors filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, assigned case numbers 2:14-bk-21180 and 2:14-bk-21181 respectively.  Both cases have been assigned to the Honorable Jeffery A. Deller. The Riverhounds Event Center, L.P. owns and operates the newly constructed Highmark Stadium located in the South Side area of Pittsburgh and claims assets ranging from $1 million to $10 million with liabilities between $10 million and $50 million.  Of those liabilities, $7.2 million is mortgage debt and $1.5 million in bank loans.  
4 years 10 months ago
On Sunday May 11, 2014, Universal Cooperatives, Inc. and its U.S. subsidiary debtors — Universal Crop Protection Alliance, LLC, Bridon Cordage LLC, Heritage Trading Company, LLC, Agrilon International LLC and Pavalon, Inc. – filed petitions for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code.  A copy of Universal Cooperatives, Inc.’s bankruptcy petition may be found here.  A list of the top 30 unsecured creditors was filed with this petition.   According to the declaration of Dennis Gyolai offered in support of the debtors’ first day motions, debtors filed the petitions in an effort to preserve and maximize the value of their business assets and estates.  A copy of the Gyolai declaration may be found here.  The debtor has obtained debtor-in-possession financing from Bank of America, debtors’ pre-petition lender. The cases have been assigned to Bankruptcy Judge Mary F. Walrath for administration (lead case no. 14-11187-MFW).
4 years 10 months ago