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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 33

Court holds that San Bernardino is eligible to file for Chapter 9
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • October 24 2013

On October 16, 2013, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California ruled that the City of San Bernardino is eligible for


City of Detroit files Chapter 9 bankruptcy petition challenges ahead
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • July 19 2013

On the afternoon of July 18, 2013, the City of Detroit filed its highly anticipated petition for relief under Chapter 9 of the Bankruptcy Code in the


Detroit bankruptcy court refuses stay of Chapter 9 eligibility hearing under Stern v. Marshall
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2013

On September 26, 2013, Judge Steven W. Rhodes of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan denied the Official Committee of


Third Circuit upholds use of discounted cash flow method under Bankruptcy Code Section 562 in In re American Home Mortgage Holdings, Inc., et al.
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • March 2 2011

On February 16, 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that a discounted cash flow analysis constituted "a commercially reasonable determinant of value" for purposes of section 562(a) of the United States Bankruptcy Code


Stern v. Marshall: how big is it?
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • July 14 2011

On June 23, 2011, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, that a Bankruptcy Judge lacked constitutional authority to issue a final ruling on state law counterclaims by a debtor against a claimant


Delaware’s not so safe harbors: Third Circuit Bankruptcy Court declines to rule that a payment on a letter of credit is an avoidance-proof “settlement payment”
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • April 17 2012

On March 26, 2012, Judge Mary F. Walrath of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware refused to rule that, as a matter of law, payments made to satisfy a debtor’s obligations under a letter of credit constitute “settlement payments” protected from avoidance under section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code


American Home court denies bank’s deficiency claim by accepting discounted cash flow valuation of mortgage loan portfolio subject to repurchase agreement
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • September 17 2009

A Delaware bankruptcy court recently delivered the first decision applying section 562 of the Bankruptcy Code to a claim based on the termination of a repurchase agreement


Lenders file motions to dismiss twenty-one General Growth Properties bankruptcy cases as bad-faith filings
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • June 4 2009

Metropolitan Insurance Company has joined ING Clarion Capital Loan Services, Inc., Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and FRM Funding Company, Inc in requesting the Bankruptcy Court to dismiss as bad-faith filings the bankruptcy cases of twenty-one property-level CMBS borrower subsidiaries of General Growth Properties, Inc


Lehman bankruptcy court holds ISDA swap counterparty in violation of automatic staycounterparty seeks modification
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • September 29 2009

In a recent ruling from the bench, Judge James M. Peck of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York held that Metavante Corporation’s suspension of payments under an outstanding swap agreement with Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc. (“LBSF”) was not safe harbored, and instead violated the automatic stay of section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code


Delaware Bankruptcy Court decision in SemCrude prohibits triangular setoff in absence of safe harbor
  • Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
  • USA
  • March 31 2009

Earlier this year, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware ruled that a nondebtor cannot effect a "triangular" setoff of the amounts owed between it and three affiliated debtors, even if the parties had entered into pre-petition contracts that expressly contemplated multiparty setoff