Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Bankruptcy StrategistKickerFeaturesSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Big Investment Banks Win Big in Congress

By Michael L. Cook and Leslie W. Chervokas
May 24, 2005

The major investment banks secured a big win with the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention & Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (the Act). They quietly convinced Congress to remove the strongest limitation in the Bankruptcy Code (' 101(14)) on a Chapter 11 debtor's employment of an investment banker. That prohibition, in effect since the Depression, had essentially prevented the debtor's retention of a banker for any of the debtor's outstanding securities (Id.). The securities industry called the statutory ban “anti-competitive” (see, eg, Securities Industry Assn. Position Paper at http://www.sia.com (hereinafter, “SIA”)).

The SEC had warned Congress 2 years ago, when the SIA had proposed a legislative change, that a “one-size-fits-all” approach may be insufficient in light of a 1938 study of corporate reorganization practices. (See letter dated May 22, 2003 from SEC Chairman William H. Donaldson to Hon. P. Leahy and Hon. P. Sarbanes). The SEC's study showed that potential or actual conflicts had often existed among underwriters, investment bankers and their attorneys due to … the extent of the financial interest of the underwriter in the enterprise, the underwriter's relationship to the management under whose auspices the company failed, participation in the acts of mismanagement for which legal liability might be imposed or which might make new management desirable or necessary, and fraudulent or negligent activities in connection with the sale of the securities. (Collier on Bankruptcy, ' 327.04[2][a][iii][D] at 3-327 and n. 44 (15th rev. ed. 2005) citing SEC, Report on the Study and Investigation of the Work Activities, Personnel and Functions of Protective and Reorganization Committees, pt. II at 172.)

Assuming that the investment bank is not a creditor, shareholder or insider, the only issue now under the Act will be whether the bank holds a “materially adverse interest to the debtor or its estate, or to creditors or equity security holders … [.]” (Code ' 101(14) (amended).) The investment bank will still have to show its “disinterested” status at the outset, however. And even if a potential conflict is overcome early on, the nature of the bank's involvement may be reassessed later.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.