Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

When Worlds Collide

By Karen Grande, John Whitlock, Steven B. Smith and Theodore Orson
April 26, 2013

It is unlikely that when Philip Wylie and Edwin Balmer co-authored “When Worlds Collide” 80 years ago, they were envisioning the growing wave of distressed municipalities and publicly financed projects, and the resulting collision between two heretofore separate and distinct worlds: that of public finance (where collection was simply not much of a consideration) and the insolvency world (where collection is the primary consideration). Until recently, the public finance world simply did not experience significant defaults. In financings where a municipality had agreed to pay for a publicly financed facility from that municipality's general funds, although detailed default and remedies provisions were included, repayment was considered sacrosanct because a default would render the municipality virtually unfinanceable.

Where it was contemplated that repayment of a publicly financed revenue-generating project would come from revenues and/or the assets comprising the project, repayment was considered safe because the bond trustee would be assigned a lien on project revenues and/or the assets compromising the project to secure bondholders' investments. Indeed, it was taken for granted that governmental debtors “always” pay, or have paid, at least since the 1870s, when cities and towns defaulted on bonds issued to facilitate the construction of transcontinental railroads. According to Moody's Investors Service, the average default rate for all rated municipal bonds between 1970-2011 was 0.13%, while during the same period the default rate for rated corporate bonds was 11.17% (Moody's Investors Service, Special Comment, U.S. Municipal Board Defaults and Recoveries, 1970-2011, accessed on April 12, 2013, http://bit.ly/12OHNWi). The collision of these two worlds has given rise to a whole host of issues related to, among others, the drafting of pledges, the interplay between special revenue bonds and state law creditor remedies, and challenges to lease revenue bonds, each of which was on public display in the bankruptcy cases of In re Las Vegas Monorail, In re City of Stockton, California, and In re Jefferson County, Alabama. We will discuss each of these cases in turn.

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
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It Image

Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?

Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough Image

There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.

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.

A Lawyer's System for Active Reading Image

Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.

Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls Image

With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.