A Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004 examination is commonly referred to as a “fishing expedition”[1] into a debtor’s financial affairs. Debtors, trustees and creditors routinely use Rule 2004 exams to investigate an examinee’s financial affairs with very little interference by bankruptcy courts or discovery rule limitations.
Editor's Note - The Unsecured Trade Creditor's Committee recently hosted a committee call dealing with these same cases. To listen to the recording of this call, click here.
The Bankruptcy Code defines “claim” as a “right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment, liquidated, unliquidated, fixed, contingent, matured, unmatured, disputed, undisputed, legal, equitable, secured, or unsecured….”[1] Congress intended the “broadest possible” definition, and that the Code “contemplates
Over the last decade or so, the vast majority of chapter 11 cases not converted to chapter 7 have resulted in sales of the debtors' assets. The sales were accomplished either under § 363 of the Bankruptcy Code or pursuant to a liquidating chapter 11 plan.
In a recent decision arising out of the Lehman case, which has been characterized as the largest and most complex bankruptcy in history and saw professional fees and expenses exceed $1.8 billion, the U.S.
In seeking to protect rights in collateral during the course of a bankruptcy case, secured creditors should be aware of potential fraudulent transfer liability and its far-reaching effect on the ability to protect collateral.
By virtue of loan agreements or a debtor’s acquiescence, a creditor often has varying degrees of influence and control over a debtor and its business. Sometimes, however, a creditor may utilize this control to benefit itself at the expense of other creditors.
In recent years, the practice of bankruptcy claims trading has grown dramatically and now represents a multibillion-dollar-per-year marketplace. However, a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit may give pause to prospective claim purchasers.
Seemingly straightforward on its face, certain aspects of the Bankruptcy Code’s “new value” defense[1] have proven frustratingly unclear for practitioners around the country. Illustrative of this frustration is the elusive answer to perhaps the simplest question: When does it apply?
Until recently, most attorneys gave little thought as to whether they should be signing proofs of claim in bankruptcy cases on behalf of their clients. If it was more convenient to have an attorney do so, attorneys followed their clients’ wishes and complied.