Here’s more in the continuing “Year in Review” series, catching up on more of my backlog of twitter posts of case developments in the past 12 months.

Each post in this Year in Review series will feature a different federal courthouse in each state of the Union. The inset photo is of the US Courthouse for the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas in Little Rock, home to Bankruptcy Judges Evans, Mixon and Taylor.

 

·         B-DE suggests w/drawal of reference to let D-Ct. decide if adversary should be transferred based on diversity grounds https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/IMMC-BK-D-Del-Carey-2-14-12.pdf …

·         B-DE: BK trustee has standing under SCOTUS Navarro decision to bring diversity case bec. liq. trust itself isnt pltf. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/IMMC-BK-D-Del-Carey-2-14-12.pdf …

·         B-DE doubts rt. to transfer cases per 28 USC §1631, despite 3d Cir dicta, bec. BK Cts. not w/in 28 USC §610 def. of cts https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/IMMC-BK-D-Del-Carey-2-14-12.pdf …

·         B-DE: Discl st or plan that didn’t identify expected post-confirm. non-ch. 5 avoidance litig. deprives Ct of jurisd. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/IMMC-BK-D-Del-Carey-12-29-11.pdf …

·         B-OR: If a state ct case is successfully removed to fed. ct, no mand. abstention bec no other related proceeding exists https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/SequoiaVillage-BK-D-Or-Alley-2-14-12.pdf …

·         B-TX: No direct appeal to Circuit Ct per §158(d)(2) pre-BAPCPA BK cases, even if adversary proc. not filed until 2006 https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/HeritageOrg-BK-ND-TX-Houser-2-14-12.pdf …

·         B-MA: Admin. exp. priority for severance pay limited exclusively to that portion attributable to postpetition services. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/QuincyMedical-BK-D-MA-Hoffman-2-13-12.pdf …

·         B-MA: Severance pay gets admin priority only to extent it’s tied to length of service so it’s part of employee’s comp https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/QuincyMedical-BK-D-MA-Hoffman-2-13-12.pdf …

·         B-NC: Dbtr’s assgnmt to creditor of money it’s entitled to receive from 3d party is perfected & complete when executed https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Helms-BK-WD-NC-Whitley-2-14-12.pdf …

·         D-OH analyzes at length why ch 13 age discrim claimant is judicially estopped from pursuing claim not in BK schedules https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Harrah-D-OH-Nugent-2-9-12.pdf…

·         D-NJ: Rooker-Feldman doesnt apply to ttee action to determineextent & validity of Dbtr’s property ownership interests https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Sheehan-D-NJ-Wolfson-2-9-12.pdf …

·         D-NJ: Stern inapplic. to Ttee’s adversary to determine extent & validity of Dbtr’s property ownership interests https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Sheehan-D-NJ-Wolfson-2-9-12.pdf …

·         B-SDNY: Ch 15 dbtr adversarys not stayed indef. bec. Fed. Maritime Comm. lacks excl. or prim. JD over affirm. defenses https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/ContainershipCo-BK-SDNY-Lane-2-10-12.pdf …

·         B-SDNY: BK signif. changes balance of factors in deciding whether to allow a class action, which may be less desirable https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Lear-BK-SDNY-Gropper-2-10-12.pdf …

·         B-SDNY: Ord. recourse of cr. alleging lack of adeq. notice of bar date is to request right to file late proof of claim https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Lear-BK-SDNY-Gropper-2-10-12.pdf …

·         B-SDNY: BK Ct. will decide BK issues on scope of discharge in plan & confirm. order but abstain on antitrust issues https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Lear-BK-SDNY-Gropper-2-10-12.pdf …

·         B-SDNY: Broad postconfirm jurisdiction to enforce discharge isn’t exclusive to BK Ct, which still has non-excl. jurisd https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Lear-BK-SDNY-Gropper-2-10-12.pdf …

·         B-NC: Only minority of cts permit plan discrimination ag. unsec. crs. in favor of long-term nondischargeable debt https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Sutton-BK-ED-NC-Doub-2-9-12.pdf …

·         B-NC: 2 basic elements to unfair discrim. per §1129(b)(1) are reasonableness & necessity in light of basis for discrim https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Sutton-BK-ED-NC-Doub-2-9-12.pdf …

·         B-NC analyzes unfair discrim. test per §1129(b)(1) as interpreted by many courts and commentators. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Sutton-BK-ED-NC-Doub-2-9-12.pdf …

·         D-MS: Ch 13 dbtr has duty to disclose postconfirm. claims but it’d be inequitable to bar claims per judicial estoppel https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Wyeth-SD-MS-Lee-2-15-12.pdf …

·         D-MS: 4 Cir. Cts have taken separate approaches to determine the proper disposition of ch 13 dbtr’s post-confirm assets https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Wyeth-SD-MS-Lee-2-15-12.pdf …

·         D-TX affirms denial of BK class cert. for WARN Act claimants: lack of numerosity & not superior method” of adjudication https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/TWLCorp-ED-TX-Gilstrap-2-14-12.pdf …

·         D-IL agrees that parties may waive Stern-based objections bec it’s not a s-m jurisd. issue that can be raised anytime https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Sharifeh-ND-IL-Leinenweber-2-10-12.pdf …

·         B-NY: Dbtr w/multiple parcels is single asset real estate dbtr per “single project” test; tenants’ activity irrelevant https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/JJMMCorp-BK-EDNY-Trust-2-15-12.pdf …

·         7th: Plan that tries to squeeze a modified §1129(b)(2)(A)(i) cramdown in a §1129(b)(2)(A)(iii) indubit equiv plan fails https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/RiverEast-7th-Posner-1-19-12(1).pdf …

·         7th: Zero-coupon T-bills @ 3% paying $38 million on §1111(b) sec. claim isnt indubit equiv. of retaining lien on bldg. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/RiverEast-7th-Posner-1-19-12(1).pdf …

·         7th: Cramdown of oversecured cr. permits collat. substit as indubit equiv if risk of becoming undersecured doesnt go up https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/RiverEast-7th-Posner-1-19-12(1).pdf …

·         7th: Collateral substitution in a secured cramdown impermissible as indubitable equiv. if the creditor is undersecured. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/RiverEast-7th-Posner-1-19-12(1).pdf …

·         Important 7th Cir opinion by Judge Posner on cramdown standards generally and in the single asset real estate context. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/RiverEast-7th-Posner-1-19-12.pdf …

·         D-KS: Only one distinguishable case dismissed a pref. cplt on a motion to dismiss based on ord. course of bus. defense https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Brooke-D-KS-Lungstrum-1-13-12(1).pdf …

·         D-KS: Cplt that sweeps in large #’s of innocent pymts doesnt state a plausible claim that any partic. pymt was fr. tsf. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Brooke-D-KS-Lungstrum-1-13-12.pdf …

·         D-KS won’t adopt a per se rule by which any payment for an antecedent debt constitutes reasonably equivalent value. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Brooke-D-KS-Lungstrum-1-13-12.pdf …

·         B-IL: Severance pymts are prop. of estate & not exempt per IL Wage Deduc. Act, but may be per IL Unempl. Ben. Exemption https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Jokiel-BK-ND-IL-Barbosa-1-5-12.pdf …

·         SDNY examines interplay bet. §1509 & §1524, and grants comity to Mex. BK case order that stays US action ag. guarantors https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/CTInvestment-SDNY-Sweet-1-11-12.pdf …

·         B-DE: Cplt ag. insiders for breach of fiduc. duty & duty of loyalty & for aiding/abetting survives a motion to dismiss. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/DirectResponseMedia-BK-D-DEL-Gross-1-12-12.pdf …

·         B-DE reminds that §102(b)(7) exculpation defense is an affirmative one & viability shdn’t be decided at dismissal stage https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/DirectResponseMedia-BK-D-DEL-Gross-1-12-12.pdf …

·         B-DE reminds that permissive abstention is an “extraordinary & narrow exception… [that] rarely should be invoked.” https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/DirectResponseMedia-BK-D-DEL-Gross-1-12-12.pdf …

·         B-DE: In pari delicto doctrine is inapplicable when the action is brought against insiders of a debtor. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/DirectResponseMedia-BK-D-DEL-Gross-1-12-12.pdf …

·         B-DE: Judge Gross compares broad & narrow interpretations of Stern’s applicability & sides w/the narrow view. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/DirectResponseMedia-BK-D-DEL-Gross-1-12-12.pdf …

·         B-DE: Judge Gross takes a crack at applying Stern to typical multi-count avoidance/breach of duty cplt ag. insiders. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/DirectResponseMedia-BK-D-DEL-Gross-1-12-12.pdf …

·         B-DE: Walsh, J agrees w/Refco that §544(b)(1) actions are core proceedings that BK Ct can constit enter final orders on https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/DBSI-BK-D-DEL-Walsh-1-13-12.pdf …

·         B-NC: Filed proof of claim let BK Ct constit. decide per Stern actions for breach of credit agr. it otherwise couldn’t https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/FreewayFoods-BK-WD-NC-Waldrep-1-13-12.pdf …

·         B-NC: Waldrep J. analyzes Stern’s application to multi-count cplt involving Waffle House takeovers of Freeway Foods. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/FreewayFoods-BK-WD-NC-Waldrep-1-13-12.pdf …

·         B-PA:Harrisburg loses appeal rights by filing notice of appeal based on date of entry of opinion, not the order itself. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/Harrisburg-BK-MD-PA-France-12-13-11.pdf …

·         B-AL:Jefferson Cty Ch. 9 BK stays pending receivership & motion to abstain or lift stay in favor of receivership denied https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/JeffersonCtyAL-BK-ND-AL-Bennett-1-6-12.pdf …

·         5th: In pari delicto defense loses its sting when the person who is in pari delicto is eliminated & receiver appointed. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/JonesvWFB-5th-PerCuriam-1-9-12.pdf …

·         5th:Applying in pari delicto in receivership wd undermine-& thus be inconsistent with-a primary purpose of the doctrine https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/JonesvWFB-5th-PerCuriam-1-9-12.pdf …

·         5th: While BK law/§541(a)(1) permits applic. of in pari delicto doctrine against BK trustees, receivership law doesn’t. https://bankruptcylitigationblog.lexblogplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/427/uploads/file/JonesvWFB-5th-PerCuriam-1-9-12.pdf …

·         B-TX:Prefs. w/in public rts bec of SCOTUS ops in Thomas & Katz, & close integ. of pref actions to claims adjud. process http://bit.ly/Agy7y7

·         B-TX: BK clause in constit. was very political: stability of dbtr-cred. rel. was closely linked to republic’s vitality http://bit.ly/Agy7y7

·         B-TX: Isgur, J provides handy chart summarizing major SCOTUS cases directly or indirectly addressing preference actions http://bit.ly/Agy7y7

·         B-TX: Isgur, J provides deep historical review of authority post-Stern for a BK Ct to decide a BK preference case. http://bit.ly/Agy7y7

·         7th: Expert’s regression had as many bloody wounds as Julius Caesar when he was stabbed 23 times by the Roman Senators. http://bit.ly/zVDZ1t

·         7th: If party’s own atty cant understand expert, the Ct should not allow the expert to testify http://bit.ly/zVDZ1t

·         7th Cir reviews indefinite/unenforceable contracts & promissory estoppel doctrine in high stakes suit bet. ATA & Fed Ex http://bit.ly/zVDZ1t

·         7th:No Ct approval needed for nondebtor’s allocation of proceeds in ch 7 settlmnt whack-up to pre-ch 11 conversion atty http://bit.ly/xTevUD

·         7th: Entites found part of Dbtr’s BK estate were necessarily under “common control” to establ. MPPAA w/drawal liability http://bit.ly/xcTbQV

 Thanks for reading!  More to follow soon.