Search results
Order by most recent / most popular / relevance
Results: 1-10 of 47
Ninth Circuit confirms existence of ride through doctrine in Chapter 11 cases
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- August 21 2007
In Diamond Z Trailer, Inc. v. JZ, LLC (In re JZ, LLC), No. 07-1011 (9th Cir. B.A.P., June 18, 2007), the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirmed a Bankruptcy Court decision holding that an unscheduled executory contract rides through the bankruptcy if not assumed or rejected during the bankruptcy
Bankruptcy court allows General Growth's "bankruptcy-remote" SPEs to remain in Chapter 11 despite creditors' objections
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- September 10 2009
In a decision made on August 11, 2009, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York allowed solvent, special purpose entity subsidiaries of a bankrupt parent company, General Growth Properties, Inc., to maintain their Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases, raising several important issues related to the use of special purpose entities structured to be "bankruptcy-remote."
Court orders case transferred from New York to California
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- February 1 2008
By Order, dated January 14, 2008, United States Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn for the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, granted the motion (the "Motion") filed by a group of creditors seeking transfer of venue of the Dunmore Homes, Inc. (the "Debtor") bankruptcy case from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the "Court") to the Eastern District of California, Sacramento Division
Second Circuit holds that most important factor in assessing pre-plan settlement distribution under Rule 9019 is whether it complies with the absolute priority rule
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- March 27 2007
On March 7, 2007, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals held that "in the Chapter 11 context, whether a pre-plan settlement's distribution plan complies with the Bankruptcy Code's priority scheme will be the most important factor for a Bankruptcy Court to Consider in approving a settlement under Bankruptcy Rule 9019."
The Ninth Circuit rules on plan feasibility
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- April 26 2007
In the case of Sherman v. Harbin (In re Harbin), the Ninth Circuit decided that in determining the feasibility of a plan under Bankruptcy Code Section 1129(a)(11), a court must evaluate the possible impact of pending litigation, whether at the trial level or on appeal
Fobian overruled
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- April 10 2007
In Travelers Cas. and Sur. Co. of America v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co., 127 S. Ct. 199 (2007) ("Travelers"), the United States Supreme Court overturned a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals opinion that had made pre-petition contractual provisions awarding attorneys' fees to the prevailing party unenforceable in bankruptcy to the extent the parties litigated issues peculiar to bankruptcy law
Expanded protections for directors navigating the zone of insolvency
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- October 25 2007
In 1991, a decision of the Delaware Chancery Court helped popularize the term "zone of insolvency.”
The precedential value of an unprecedented sale - lessons from Chrysler
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 14 2009
On June 10, 2009, the sale of substantially all of Chrysler's assets closed, just 42 days after the country's third largest automaker filed for bankruptcy protection
United States Supreme Court resolves circuit split
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 9 2008
In a recent decision, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split regarding the meaning of the statutory phrase "under a plan confirmed under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy Code," as codified in 11 U.S.C. 1146(a
Ninth Circuit rules that D&O policies' "insured versus insured" exclusion applies to debtors-in-possession and assignee creditors during bankruptcy proceedings
- Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- July 22 2009
In Biltmore Assocs., LLC v. Twin City Fire Insurance Co., 2009 WL 1976071 (9th Cir. July 10, 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit applied the “insured versus insured” exclusion, common in directors’ and officers’ insurance policies (“D&O insurance”), to prevent a creditors’ trust from collecting on a D&O insurance policy under a claim assigned to it from a debtor-in-possession
Current Search
- Workarea - Litigation
- Workarea - Insolvency & Restructuring
- Firm Name - Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
Suggested Facets
Author
- Alan H. Martin (2)
- Blanka Wolfe (3)
- Carren B. Shulman (2)
- Christine L. Swanick (2)
- Geraldine Ann Freeman (2)
- John Stigi (3)
- Michael M. Lauter (3)
- Robert Sahyan (4)
- Shawn Watts (2)
- Wilda Wahpepah (2)