Business Reorganization Committee


Post date: Monday, April 27, 2015
Photo of David J. Kozlowski
David J. Kozlowski

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued an opinion on Jan. 21, 2015,[1] holding that a UCC-3 termination statement was effective to extinguish a security interest of up to as much as $1.5 billion, notwithstanding that the secured lender erroneously authorized the filing of the termination statement and did not intend to extinguish the security interest.

Post date: Friday, February 13, 2015

Privacy issues are not new to corporate reorganizations; §§ 322 and 363(b)(1) were enacted as part of BAPCPA precisely to address such concerns.[1]  In an increasingly digital age, reorganizing debtors may possess a slew of personally identifiable information (PII), itself a term defined at § 101(41A).

Post date: Friday, February 13, 2015

One of the fundamental rights afforded to a debtor is the right to reject burdensome contracts and unexpired leases. However, where the debtor is the lessor of real property or the assignor of intellectual property, rejection of the underlying agreement could be catastrophic to the nondebtor counterparty.

Post date: Monday, February 09, 2015

Every dollar counts, and for debtors that are party to tax-sharing agreements (“TSAs”), significant dollars may be at stake. As the Sixth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals have demonstrated, when dealing with tax refunds and TSAs, it is not always clear that a debtor’s estate is entitled to every dollar.

Post date: Tuesday, November 25, 2014

This two-part article discusses how the United Kingdom and the United States have become the two main jurisdictions where debtors outside of such jurisdictions (foreign debtors) have been able to successfully restructure their businesses.

Post date: Tuesday, November 25, 2014

[1]In some bankruptcy courts, the use of combined hearings on chapter 11 disclosure statements and plans in non-prepackaged, non-small business cases is expressly contemplated by local rule and relatively common.[2] Delaware, which is so often on the cutting edge of chapter 11

Post date: Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Photo of Daniel B. Besikof
Daniel B. Besikof

Bankruptcy Code § 365(n) provides significant protections to licensees under intellectual property licenses that are rejected by debtor-licensors.[1] Section 365(n) permits a licensee to retain its rights in licensed intellectual property post-rejection in exchange for the continued payment of royalties.

Post date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014

[1]In the latest installment of the Lehman Brothers subordination litigation, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York held that certain creditors’ claims were not claims for damages arising from “securities of the debtor,” and did not have to be subordinated to claims of creditors, notwithstanding that the debtor was treated as an issuer, for regulatory purposes, as an issuer of the mortgage-backed securities.[2]

Post date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014

The secondary bankruptcy claims market has become big business over the past several years, resulting in a proliferation of court rulings that underscore risks and “regulation” around claims-trading, especially when claims are purchased for strategic objectives and not anticipated cash recovery.

Post date: Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Photo of Nancy A. Peterman
Nancy A. Peterman

[1]Over the years, claims-trading has become the norm in bankruptcy cases. Claims are bought and sold for various reasons, including to liquidate a position, profit from an increase in the claim’s value and/or leverage a claim into the ownership of the debtor.


Ms. Jamie J. Fell
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
New York, NY
(212) 455-3822

Mr. Robert S. Marticello
Smiley Wang-Ekvall, LLP
Costa Mesa, CA
(714) 445-1000

Mr. Jacob Frumkin, Esq.
Communications Manager
Cole Schotz P.C.
Hackensack, NJ
(646) 563-8944

Mr. Scott D. Lawrence
Communications Manager
Wick Phillips Gould & Martin LLP
Dallas, TX
(214) 420-4449

Ms. Krista L. Kulp
Education Director
Cole Schotz P.C.
Hackensack, NY
(201) 525-6317

Mr. Dov Gottlieb
Membership Relations Director
Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP
New York, NY
(212) 455-2347

Ms. Colleen Restel
Newsletter Editor
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Roseland, NJ
(973) 597-6310

Mr. Bradley A. Cosman
Special Projects Leader
Perkins Coie LLP
Phoenix, AZ
(602) 351-8205

Please note that in order to view the content for the Committee Newsletters you must either sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member