The Restructuring Report

Nearly five years after the enactment of the Small Business Reorganization Act, what are the emerging trends for Subchapter V cases?

The Eighth Circuit became the most recent circuit to rule that avoidance causes of action are property of the bankruptcy estate and may be sold. How does this impact the practice of selling avoidance causes of action in both Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 cases? Does the Eighth Circuit’s decision open the door to the granting of a pre-petition security interest in avoidance causes of action?

Two recent bankruptcy court opinions came to different conclusions on whether the liquidating trustee is obligated to make quarterly payments post-confirmation on disbursements from the liquidating trust.

The Supreme Court’s Siegel opinion found the U.S. Trustee’s temporary fee increase unconstitutional. What are the implications of the opinion?

Shortly after the Southern District of New York ruled on third-party releases in the Purdue Pharma case, the District Court of the Eastern District of Virginia similarly overturned a plan containing third-party releases in the Ascena Retail Group bankruptcy case. How does this decision relate to the Purdue Pharma decision and what does it mean for the future of third-party releases?

Third-party releases headline news stories about major chapter 11 cases, including Purdue Pharma and the Boy Scouts of America. Will Congress consider a bill that would restrict the use of third-party releases?

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Bankruptcy Code generally has been interpreted to require debtors to pay rent obligations on time under unassumed real property leases as those obligations arose post-filing and pre-rejection. This result was driven by 11 U.S.C. § 365(d)(3), which requires the debtor to “timely perform” all obligations until the lease is assumed or rejected, with one narrow exception.

Professionals should consider the traditional tools for helping troubled businesses but also explore non-traditional methods of solving client problems.

A recent Supreme Court decision resolves an important question regarding what rights a non-debtor licensee has to continue to use a trademark under a rejected lease and may also have broader ramifications on the rights of contract parties when a contract is rejected under Section 365.