Save-the-Date!
2019 Fall Annual Meeting and Education Conference |
|
October 17 & 18, 2019
Grand Hyatt New York
Park Avenue at Grand Central Station
New York, NY 10017
|
|
Do you have any positions you are looking to fill? Please submit to
CJ Marchain.
|
To learn more about the ACIC website and how to update your bio,
click here
(bio information is around the two-minute mark).
|
Questions or comments about this edition? Please provide feedback here
with the subject heading "Monthly Newsletter Feedback".
|
|
|
ACIC Private Notes August
2019
|
|
Welcome to the August 2019 edition of the ACIC Private Notes!
This edition brings you:
- A sneak peek of the 2019 Annual Meeting and Conference, courtesy of this year's co-chairs, Alfredo Cantoral (PPM America) and Nicole Windsor (Chapman and Cutler);
- Recent case law summaries from the Mid-Atlantic Region, prepared by Margaret G. Parker-Yavuz (Akin Gump); and
- Recent case law summaries from the Midwest Region, prepared by Michael Robson (Greenberg Traurig).
|
| 2019 Annual Meeting and Conference - Register Now! |
The 2019 Annual Meeting and Education Conference takes place at the Grand Hyatt in New York on October 17 and 18. Click here to learn more about the event from this year's co-chairs, and be sure to click here to register and keep track of program updates.
We look forward to seeing you there!
|
|
Recent Case Law Summaries
|
Mid-Atlantic
In In re Aegean Marine Petroleum Network Inc., the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York denied debtors' request to release potential claims of third parties on a nonconsensual basis as part of the debtors' chapter 11 plan, finding that nonconsensual releases should be granted only where barring a specific identified claim is important to accomplish a particular feature of the restructuring. Click here to learn more.
In In re Paragon Offshore PLC, the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (i) denied a motion to determine that the Court did not have power under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to issue a final order on a core fraudulent transfer claim brought against a non-claimant defendant and (ii) concluded that bankruptcy courts have authority to enter final judgments in all core fraudulent transfer claims. Click here to learn more.
In In re Energy Future Holdings Corp., et al. v. Morgan Stanley Capital Group, Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that adequate protection payments and bankruptcy plan distributions payable to two groups of creditors should be allocated pro rata based on the amounts owed to them at the time of debtor's bankruptcy filing (and the allocation does not take into account post-petition interest). Click here
to learn more.
Midwest
In Desai v. Hanmi Bank, a suit regarding a bank's potential breach of loan documents, breach of good faith and fair dealing, and failure to fulfill duties of a receiver, the US District Court, Northern District of Illinois dismissed the claims by granting the defendant bank's Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motion and found that a plaintiff must plead all claims in a state-court action, or risk losing them, as res judicata bars the use of the same operative facts leading to further litigation. Click here to learn more.
In Cohen v. Chernushin et al, an action involving an adversary proceeding commenced by a Chapter 7 trustee to sell certain property, the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit supported the lower courts' finding that Fed. R. Bankr. P. 1016 did not prevent the debtor's joint tenancy in the home in question from terminating at his death to the detriment of the bankruptcy estate because his interest extinguished at his death, leaving him with no entitlement to the home. Click here to learn more.
In Cedar Square L.L.C. v. TCF National Bank, a dispute involving alleged liability over a bank's refusal to grant a loan for development of a construction project, the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Wisconsin granted defendant's 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss in part, and denied in part, ruling that the Wisconsin statute of frauds didn't bar the developer-plaintiff's theft by conversion claim after the bank-defendant refused to provide follow-on funding for a project, but that the claim was the only one among several that the court found was not barred by Wisconsin's statute of frauds. Click here
to learn more.
|
|
|
