Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
259 results for '* topic:"Bankruptcy"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2022-04-05
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Energy
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Walrath
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69769
The court denied as contrary to the express terms of the plan the request to reopen the bankruptcy case for the purpose of reconsidering the allowed amount of the First Lien Claims and modifying their treatment under the confirmed and consummated Plan.
Publication Date: 2022-04-05
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Construction
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Goldblatt
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69767
The court denied creditor's request to reopen the bankruptcy case because it was clear that the creditor was not entitled to the relief it sought.
Publication Date: 2022-04-05
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Legal Services | Real Estate
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Connolly
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69771
Bankruptcy court did not err in issuing a contempt order based on appellant's failure to comply with an order for the disgorgement of fees, where the bankruptcy court had not impermissibly expanded the scope or nature of appellant's status as a fictitious entity, as appellant had previously represented itself as one.
Publication Date: 2022-04-05
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Consulting | Energy | Insurance
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Sontchi
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; J. Christopher Shore, White & Case, New York, NY for the Liquidating Trust.
for defendant: Marc J. Phillips, Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhodes LLP, Wilmington, DE; Edward L. Schnitzer, New York, NY for Arcina Risk Group, LLC.
Case Number: D69768
The court held that creditor Arcina did not establish that its failure to file a timely proof of claim was the result of excusable neglect.
Publication Date: 2022-03-08
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Health Care | Real Estate
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Goldblatt
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69737
The court deferred ruling on the motion to dismiss on the pleadings because there was a dispute among federal appellate districts as to whether a corporations qualified as an individual under § 362(k) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Additionally, the court refused to dismiss plaintiffs' claim for declaratory judgment until evidence was taken. Finally, the court held it did not have jurisdiction to hear three state-law counterclaims because they were filed after the bankruptcy case was dismissed. Motion to dismiss denied in part, granted
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Patrick S. Montoya, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez, Ervin A. Gonzalez
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2022-02-08
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Sontchi
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Mark D. Collins, Marcos A. Ramos, Cory D. Kandstein, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE; Mitchell A. Karlan, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Curtis S. Miller, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Brian P. Miller, Samantha J. Kavanaugh, James A. Bombulie, Akerman LLP, Miami, FL for defendants.
Case Number: D69704
Breach of fiduciary duty claims were untimely where plaintiffs were on notice of the claims over a decade prior as the same claims had been asserted against several of the plaintiffs in a related action.
Publication Date: 2021-12-28
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Stickles
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D69654
The court held that, in this adversary proceeding, the trustee's delay in moving to amend its complaint was not undue; if the amendment was allowed, the defendant would not suffer prejudice, the motion was not brought in bad faith, and the amend-ment would relate back to the original complaint for purposes of the applicable statute of limitations.
Publication Date: 2021-12-07
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Hospitality and Lodging
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Sontchi
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Seth Van Allen, G. David Dean, Justin R. Alberto, Cole Schotz, P.C., Wilmington, DE; Luc A. Despins, Nicholas A. Basset, G. Alexander Bongartz, Paul Hastings LLP, New York, NY for plaintiff.
for defendant: Bruce W. McCullough, Bodell Bove, LLC Wilmington, DE for defendants.
Case Number: D69630
Bankruptcy court could hold adversary proceeding defendants in civil contempt for failure to comply with the court's preliminary injunction order requiring a detailed accounting and enjoining defendants from dissipating or otherwise transferring their assets, after defendants' accounting was woefully deficient and defendants expressly stated their intention to transfer funds.
Publication Date: 2021-11-16
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Construction | Real Estate
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Sontchi
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Marcy J. Mclaughlin Smith, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Wilmington, DE; Gary W. Marsh, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, Atlanta, GA; Brett D. Goodman, Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP, New York, NY for debtor.
for defendant: Daniel A. O’Brien, Venable LLP, Wilmington, DE; Jeffrey S. Sabin, James E. Frankel, Gary L. Rubin, and Carol A. Weiner, Venable LLP, New York, NY for creditors.
Case Number: D69612
Involuntary bankruptcy petition dismissed as having been filed in bad faith, where petitioning creditors represented contractors holding mechanic's liens and the totality of the circumstances indicated that petitioners sought to avoid extinguishment of their claims in a related foreclosure action and instead litigate in the more favorable forum of the bankruptcy court.
Publication Date: 2021-11-02
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Consulting | Insurance
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Sontchi
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Lisa Bittle Tancredi, Gebhardt & Smith LLP, Wilmington, DE for Risk & Regulatory Consulting, LLC. Mark E. Felger, Barry M. Klayman, Gregory F. Fischer, Wilmington, DE for Jeoffrey L. Burtch, Chapter 7 Trustee.
for defendant: Eric D. Schwartz, Matthew B. Harvey, Paige N. Topper, Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP, Wilmington, DE; Pater Ivancik, Alex M. Sher, Hogan Lovells US LLP New York, NY for Atalaya Capital Management LLP, Atalaya Special Opportunities Fund VII LP and Midtown Madison Management LLC.
Case Number: D69596
The court held that the Bankruptcy Code was not reverse preempted by the Texas Insurance Code because the underlying dispute was a contract dispute, but not the business of insurance.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read