We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 30

Supreme Court of North Dakota finds that simple interest, rather than compound interest, is appropriate under the North Dakota unpaid royalties statute. Van Sickle v. Hallmark & Assoc., Inc., 2013 ND 218 (N.D. 2013)

  • Stinson Leonard Street LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 11 2014

In Van Sickle, the plaintiffs each owned a royalty interest in a well that was originally leased by Comanche Oil Company, which later assigned its

Delaware Bankruptcy Court cuts off electricity providers’ access to Section 503(b)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code

  • McGuireWoods LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 13 2013

The Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware recently ruled in In re NE OPCO, Inc., 2013 Bankr. LEXIS 4569 (Bankr. D. Del. Nov. 1, 2013), that

What goes up ... Quick glance 3 at Ohio oil and gas leases in bankruptcy

  • Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 2 2013

As with our prior posts on oil and gas leases in bankruptcy (located here and here), this post presents another thorny issue - namely, "Is an oil and

Euroresource--deals and debt

  • Jones Day
  • -
  • Netherlands, Spain, United Kingdom, USA
  • -
  • July 30 2013

On 26 July 2013, the French government filed an amicus curiae ("friend of the court") brief supporting Argentina's petition requesting the U.S

What goes up a quick glance at Ohio oil and gas leases in bankruptcy

  • Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 5 2013

As Ohio enjoys its latest boom in oil and gas exploration, it is important to understand how oil and gas leases are treated in bankruptcy. Unsettled

A123 files Chapter 11

  • Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo PC
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 21 2012

Electric vehicle battery manufacturer A123, which received a $249 million stimulus grant from the Department of Energy, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection October 15 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware to facilitate an agreement in which Johnson Controls will purchase its automotive business assets for $125 million

A closer look at the Satcon Technology bankruptcy

  • Fox Rothschild LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 21 2012

On October 17, 2012, Satcon Technology Corporation and various of its subsidiaries (collectively, "Satcon") filed chapter 11 petitions for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware

Fifth Circuit finds that an electricity requirements contract is a “forward contract” exempt from Bankruptcy Code’s avoidance powers

  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 11 2012

On August 2, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that a requirements contract for electricity is a forward contract for purposes of section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code and, therefore, settlement payments made under the contract are exempt from avoidance as preferences

Fifth Circuit holds that fixed quantities are not required to satisfy the “forward contracts” safe harbor defense

  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 25 2012

On August 2, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that a requirements contract for the supply of electricity constituted a “forward contract” under the Bankruptcy Code and, therefore, was exempt from preference avoidance actions

Fifth Circuit applies safe harbor protection to power supply contract in real estate manager's bankruptcy

  • Hunton & Williams LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 28 2012

On August 2, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued its decision in Lightfoot v. MXEnergy Elec., Inc. (In re MBS Mgmt. Servs., Inc.), Case No. 11-30553 (5th Cir. 2012), holding that a real estate management company’s electricity supply contract qualified as a “forward contract”, payments on account of which are protected from avoidance as preferential transfers under the Bankruptcy Code’s “safe harbor” provisions