Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
While Chapter 11 is generally known as the reorganization chapter of the Bankruptcy Code, more recently, it has been used as a vehicle to manage the orderly liquidation of business entities through plans of liquidation. Whether such liquidations follow sales of a debtor's assets under ' 363 or monetization of assets of a debtor over time, the liquidating plan often provides for payments to the creditor body that generally follow the priority of distribution set forth in ' 726.
The “best interests of creditors test,” which must be met in order to confirm any Chapter 11 plan, states: “[w]ith respect to each impaired class of claims or interests ' (A) each holder of a claim or interest of such class ' (i) has accepted the plan; or (ii) will receive or retain under the plan on account of such claim or interest property of a value, as of the effective date of the plan, that is not less than the amount that such holder would so receive or retain if the debtor were liquidated under Chapter 7 of this title on such date.” 11 U.S.C. ' 1129(a)(7)(A).
Notably, in a Chapter 7 case, under ' 726(a), late-filed priority claims receive payment before any unsecured nonpriority claims are paid, and late filed unsecured nonpriority claims will be paid before timely filed claims on account of fines, penalties, punitive damages, or interest on unsecured claims, and before the holders of equity interests receive any distribution. What happens if a claim is disallowed under ' 502(b)(9) because it is tardily filed, but that same claimant would receive a distribution in a hypothetical Chapter 7 liquidation of the debtor? Does that claimant have standing to assert her rights under the best interests test at plan confirmation, and if so, must the Chapter 11 plan make provision for distributions on account of late-filed claims? Or, is it clear that once a late-filed claim is disallowed in Chapter 11, the holder of that claim is not entitled to the protections of the best interests test?
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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 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.
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.
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.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?