Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
56 results for '* topic:"Bankruptcy"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2019-11-11
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Automotive
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Fuentes
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-1322
Secured creditors who repossessed collateral prior to the debtor's filing of a bankruptcy petition did not violate the automatic stay by retaining possession after receiving notice of the bankruptcy because retaining possession was not an affirmative act to exercise control over property of the bankruptcy estate. Order of the district court affirmed.
Publication Date: 2019-11-11
Practice Area: Bankruptcy | Creditors' and Debtors' Rights
Industry: Automotive
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Justice Fuentes
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ellen M. McDowell and Daniel Reinganum (McDowell Law)
for defendant: No brief
Case Number: 18-3562
Creditors Not Obligated to Return Collateral Repossessed Prior to Bankruptcy Petition Upon Notice of Petition and Request for Return
Publication Date: 2019-11-06
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Energy
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Per Curiam
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68760
District court correctly affirmed the bankruptcy court's disallowance of a bondholder's proof of claim where the bondholder had sold the bonds prior to filing a proof of claim, since the buyer of the bonds became the party with the right to payment of the principal and interest on the bond.
Publication Date: 2019-10-07
Practice Area: Bankruptcy | Criminal Law
Industry: Construction
Court: Supreme Court
Judge: Justice Mundy
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 19-1176
Restitution orders could not be discharged in bankruptcy since they served criminal justice goals and were therefore exempt from discharge under the code. Order of the superior court affirmed.
Publication Date: 2019-09-23
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Financial Services and Banking | Real Estate | State and Local Government
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Justice Roth
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Elliott J. Almanza and Keith A. Bonchi (Goldenberg, Mackler, Sayegh, Mintz, Pfeffer, Bonchi & Gill)
for defendant: Leonard C. Walczyk (Wasserman, Jurista & Stolz)
Case Number: 18-1650
Voidance of Preferential Transfer under Bankruptcy Code Required Despite Potentially Competing State Interests in Real Estate and Tax Collection
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors: Jonathan H. Lomurro, Gary L. Riveles, Abbott S. Brown
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2019-07-03
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Energy | Investments and Investment Advisory
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Bibas
Attorneys: For plaintiff: GianClaudio Finizio and Neil B. Glassman, Bayard P.A., Wilmington, DE; Jeremy C. Hollembeak, Michael S. Kim, Benjamin J. Sauter and Andrew D. Wang, Kobre & Kim, New York, NY for Delaware Trust Co. Ashley R. Altschuler and R. Craig Martin, DLA Piper, Wilmington, DE
for defendant: Thomas J. Curtin, Ellen M. Halstead, Howard R. Hawkins, Jr., Michele Maman and Mark C. Ellenberg, Cadwalader Wicker-sham & Taft, New York, NY and Washington, DC; Scott B. Czerwonka, Wilks Lukoff & Bracegirdle, Wilmington, DE for Mor-gan Stanley Capital Group Inc. George A. Davis, Latham & Watkins, New York, NY; Michael D. DeBaecke, Ashby & Geddes, Wilmington, DE; Peter M. Friedman, Jonathan Rosenberg and Daniel S. Shamah, O'Melveny & Myers, Washington, DC and New York, NY; Thomas R. Hooper and Mark D. Kotwick, Seward & Kissel, New York, NY; Joseph H. Huston, Jr., Stevens & Lee, Wilmington, DE for Wilmington Trust N.A. Mark E. Felger and Simon Fraser, Cozen O'Connor, Wilmington, DE; Hu-mayun Khalid, Thomas J. Moloney and Sean A. O'Neal, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton, New York, NY for J. Aron & Co. Bradley R. Aronstam and Nicholas D. Mozal, Ross Aronstam & Moritz, Wilmington, DE , Adam B. Banks, Weil Gotshal & Manges, New York, NY for Titan Investment Holdings LP.
Case Number: D68617
Following approval of a bankruptcy plan and corporate restructuring, payments and distributions to creditors were no longer considered collateral or proceeds under the waterfall provision of an intercreditor agreement.
Publication Date: 2019-04-24
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Accounting
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Chagares
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68535
Breach of fiduciary duty against company controllers dismissed with prejudice where complainant could not establish that managers acted in bad faith in pursuing and consummating merger that allegedly led to debtor's financial difficulties.
Publication Date: 2019-03-06
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Ambro
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Douglas A. Campbell and Kathryn L. Harrison, Campbell & Levine, Pittsburgh, PA for appellant.
for defendant: Neal H. Levin, Freeborn & Peters, Chicago, IL for appellee.
Case Number: D68479
Bankruptcy court did not err in utilizing non-necessities approach to determine fraudulent transfer liability involving an entireties account, but moving forward bankruptcy courts should utilize a pro rata approach to calculate liability.
Publication Date: 2018-12-17
Practice Area: Bankruptcy | Creditors' and Debtors' Rights | Landlord Tenant Law
Industry: Entertainment and Leisure
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Justice Ambro
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Stuart J. Moskovitz
for defendant: Jeffrey A. Cooper, Barry J. Roy, and John H. Harmon (Rabinowitz Lubetkin & Tully)
Case Number: 17-3607
Plaintiff Tenant Could Apply Setoff Against Rent Under Bankruptcy Code Where Rent and Recoupment Provisions Arose from Same Lease Transaction
Publication Date: 2018-12-10
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Biotechnology | Health Care
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Circuit Judge Rendell
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: 18-1447
Bankruptcy court properly declined to transfer an adversary proceeding under 28 U.S.C. §1631 because exercising jurisdiction over the adversary proceeding so as to transfer it under §1631 would have been ultra vires, regardless of whether bankruptcy courts fell under §610's definition of courts. Affirmed.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read