Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The impact of COVID-19 on efforts of businesses to reorganize or even orderly liquidate in bankruptcy has been swift and devastating, particularly in the retail sector. Who could have ever thought that the economy would be so shut down that restructuring efforts under the Bankruptcy Code would be impossible? In the financial apocalypse of 2008, the notion was that certain financial institutions were too big to fail. With the COVID-19 pandemic, "too shut down to shut down" may be the mantra to describe efforts under the Bankruptcy Code.
Whether it is orderly liquidation or reorganization, COVID-19 is serving as a massive impediment to bankruptcy relief. With uncertainty as to when the pandemic will ease, Bankruptcy Courts do not seem to be a panacea leading to successful reorganizations or orderly liquidations for troubled companies.
Pleadings in bankruptcy cases almost always lead with a chronological history of financial difficulties, including cash flow issues, burdensome debt loads, and oppressive litigation. COVID-19 has downgraded the significance of such chronologies for retailers.
Art Van Furniture and its affiliated entities (Art Van) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in Delaware on March 8, 2020. The plan was to orderly liquidate certain stores, and operate other stores, while seeking going concern transactions. That plan quickly evaporated. On April 3, Art Van filed a motion to convert the Chapter 11 case to one under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, where it will lose control of its businesses. The standard bankruptcy chronology had now been replaced. As described in Art Van's motion to convert:
These Chapter 11 Cases were pending for just three days when on March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak to be a pandemic. These Chapter 11 Cases were pending for just five days when on March 13, 2020 the Trump administration declared a national emergency in response to COVID-19 outbreak. These Chapter 11 Cases were pending for just six days when on March 14, 2020, government regulators in Pennsylvania, one of four states in which the Debtors' core retail operations are concentrated, issued guidance urging all non-essential business to close, with other states and localities soon to follow. And, these Chapter 11 Cases were pending for just eleven to fourteen days when the four states in which the Debtors' principal operations are located — Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Illinois — issued "stay at home" or "shelter in place" orders.
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?