In December, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari in bankruptcy case In re Piccadilly Cafeterias Inc. The issues raised are worth reviewing, especially as well-settled 3rd Circuit jurisprudence is implicated.

In 2003, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in In re Hechinger Investment Co. of Delaware. In that case, the court was asked to decide whether a transfer of real property is exempt from real estate transfer tax under �1146(c) of the Bankruptcy Code (now restyled as �1146(a)), when the transfer was not authorized “under a plan confirmed under section 1129,” but rather authorized pursuant to �363 of the code. Then-Circuit Judge Samuel Alito, writing for the court, said, quite simply, no. The Hechinger court concluded that the most natural reading of the phrase “under a plan confirmed” means that the transfer is “authorized” by such a plan, and thus the �1146(c) exemption does not apply to pre-confirmation transfers of real property.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]