Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

The Bankruptcy StrategistKickerFeaturesTopicsCommercial LawLitigationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Enron and Anna Nicole Smith

By Ronald R. Sussman and Seth Van Aalten
July 30, 2008

On May 1, 2008, Cooley Godward Kronish LLP's bankruptcy litigation team, acting as counsel to the Official Employment-Related Issues Committee of Enron Corp. (the 'Employee Committee'), obtained a court-approved settlement of $850,000 from the Estate of John Cliff Baxter (the 'Baxter Estate'), a former 'Top Hat' executive of Enron who elected to accelerate approximately $1.3 million in deferred compensation benefits on the eve of the bankruptcy filing and committed suicide shortly thereafter. That and other similar transfers were challenged by the Employee Committee in a complaint filed against Baxter and other former executives alleging causes of action in preference and fraudulent transfer.

Although a number of the transferees challenged (unsuccessfully) the personal jurisdiction of the Enron bankruptcy court, only the Baxter Estate challenged its jurisdiction over the subject matter of the litigation. In a motion for summary judgment filed in December 2005, the Baxter Estate asserted that the Enron bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the Employee Committee's action under the so-called 'probate exception' to federal jurisdiction. The probate exception is a judicially crafted exception to otherwise proper federal jurisdiction that reserves to state probate courts such exclusive powers as the annulment of a will, the administration of a decedent's estate, and the disposal of property in their custody. At its core, the probate exception reiterates the general principle that where one court is exercising jurisdiction over property, a second court should not assume jurisdiction over the same property.

This premium content is locked for LJN Newsletters 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
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.