Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

10th Circuit Looks At Nuances of Challenging Fraudulent Conveyance

By Francis J. Lawall and Marcy J. McLaughlin Smith
September 01, 2020

Under the Bankruptcy Code, not only can the initial recipient of a fraudulent conveyance be held liable, but so too can a subsequent transferee. However, there can be important nuances in the challenged transaction that may provide a subsequent transferee with a substantial defense. One of those nuances was recently identified by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which highlighted the difference between the receipt of the asset which was fraudulently conveyed and the proceeds of such asset. See, Rajala v. Spencer Fane (In re Generation Resources Holding), 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 21454 (10th Cir. July 10, 2020).

Pre-petition, debtor Generation Resources Holding Co., LLC entered into development agreements for three wind power projects with Edison Capital, under which agreements Generation was the sole developer. Several months later, insiders of Generation created two new LLCs — LWHC and FWHC — and revised the development agreements so that the project developers were changed from Generation to LWHC and FWHC, respectively. The revised development agreements had the effect of transferring Generation's right to receive substantial payments under the agreements to LWHC and FWHC.

Years later, but after Generation filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, LWHC demanded payment from Edison. Although Edison paid, it unilaterally reduced the amount from $10.5 million to $5.5 million. In response, LWHC hired Husch Blackwell to bring suit against Edison for the remaining balance. Although LWHC prevailed in its action against Edison, the court ordered Edison to pay the $9 million judgment into the court pending judgment from the bankruptcy court as to whether the $9 million was property of LWHC or of the bankrupt Generation estate.

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
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.

'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers Image

In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.

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.

CoStar Wins Injunction for Breach-of-Contract Damages In CRE Database Access Lawsuit Image

Latham & Watkins helped the largest U.S. commercial real estate research company prevail in a breach-of-contract dispute in District of Columbia federal court.

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.