In Levin v. Verizon Bus. Global LLC (In re OneStar Long Distance Inc.),[1] the U.S.
Committees Committee
Committees
It is no secret that the IRS and other taxing authorities do well in bankruptcy, often at the frustration of both debtors and general unsecured creditors. For debtors, tax claims frequently are nondischargeable. For general unsecured creditors, IRS claims are entitled to higher priority.
Given the media saturation, it is virtually impossible for any American to be unaware of the allegations that Russia and President Putin interfered in the 2016 presidential elections. But only a much smaller subset of the population likely knows that Russia and then-Prime Minister Putin also played a key role in Eclipse Aviation Corp.’s bankruptcy case seven years earlier.
The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued an important opinion addressing the question of when goods are “received” for purposes of § 503(b)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code in In re World Imports Ltd.[1] Reversing two lower courts, the appellate court held that in determining whether a seller is entitled to an administrativ
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently provided guidance to practitioners representing suppliers and materialmen looking to secure their otherwise unsecured debt through the filing of a mechanic’s lien following the bankruptcy of a contractor.
Editor's Note: For a new decision upholding a gift plan despite Jevic, see In re Nuverra Environmental Solutions Inc., 17-1024 (D. Del. Aug.
One of my very favorite things about bankruptcy practice is that it seems that for every decision from any particular court, you can usually find another decision from another court holding to the contrary. Divergent bankruptcy decisions often result from nuanced facts particular to the specific case.
One of a plan proponent’s primary tasks in the confirmation process is seeking the acceptance of creditors whose claims would be impaired under the proposed plan.
Bankruptcy trustees often find that by the time a case has commenced, potential fraudulent transfers are already so far in the past that they are beyond the reach of the two-year look-back period under § 548 of the Bankruptcy Code.
In In re Clark,[1] the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a bankruptcy court’s determination to substantively consolidate an individual’s chapter 7 bankruptcy estate with the assets of a non-debtor limited liability company ranch and a trust that the debtor controlled.