Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 26

Perfection and priority of oil & gas producers' liens in doubt

Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP
-
USA
-
June 25 2009

Oil and gas producers in Texas and a handful of other states have had the comfort of believing that they held purchase money security interests against the production in the hands of first purchasers and proceeds of that production

Third Circuit reaffirms 1999 O’Brien decision regarding application of Bankruptcy Code Section 503(b) to break-up fees of stalking horse bidders

Squire Sanders
-
USA
-
April 28 2010

In 1999 the Third Circuit Court of Appeals rendered its decision in Calpine Corp. v. O’Brien Environmental Energy, Inc. (In re O’Brien Environmental Energy, Inc.), 181 F.2d 527, denying Calpine Corporation’s request for the payment of a break-up fee after Calpine lost its effort to acquire the assets of O’Brien Environmental Energy out of bankruptcy

A closer look at the Bicent Power bankruptcy

Fox Rothschild LLP
-
USA
-
April 29 2012

On April 23, 2012, Bicent Holdings LLC, and various related entities (collectively "Bicent" or the "Debtors") filed petitions for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware

NAESB contract not protected by Bankruptcy Code safe harbor provisions

McDermott Will & Emery
-
USA
-
October 8 2007

The decision of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Hutson v. Smithfield Packing Co. (In re National Gas Distributors, LLC) poses potentially serious problems for parties trading gas under the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) base contract

Lehman Brothers ruling calls into question enforceability of cross-affiliate netting in bankruptcy

Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP
-
USA
-
May 18 2010

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York recently issued an opinion in the case of In re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. that significantly restricts the scope of setoff rights for energy traders and other participants in derivatives and forward commodity markets

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

Collection of utility charges does not fit within automatic stay exceptions

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP
-
USA
-
July 26 2011

Grede Foundries owned a smelting plant in Reedsburg, Wisconsin

Is triangular set-off enforceable under US laws?

Reed Smith LLP
-
USA
-
January 29 2009

It is not uncommon to find in trading agreements triangular set-off provisions, also commonly referred to as “cross-affiliates” set-off clauses

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

Bankruptcy Court: parties may not contract around mutuality requirement to circumvent prohibition against triangular setoffs

McDermott Will & Emery
-
USA
-
January 14 2009

The decision in In re SemCrude, L.P., et al. prohibiting parties from contracting around Bankruptcy Code section 553’s mutuality requirement may disrupt customary business practices, including those widely used in the energy, natural gas and crude oil markets, because it rules that contracting for cross affiliate netting does not “create” the mutuality required for setoff

next >

Search results

Perfection and priority of oil & gas producers' liens in doubt

Third Circuit reaffirms 1999 O’Brien decision regarding application of Bankruptcy Code Section 503(b) to break-up fees of stalking horse bidders

A closer look at the Bicent Power bankruptcy

NAESB contract not protected by Bankruptcy Code safe harbor provisions

Lehman Brothers ruling calls into question enforceability of cross-affiliate netting in bankruptcy

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

Collection of utility charges does not fit within automatic stay exceptions

Is triangular set-off enforceable under US laws?

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

Bankruptcy Court: parties may not contract around mutuality requirement to circumvent prohibition against triangular setoffs

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Workarea