Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Obtaining Administrative Claim Status When Doing Business With a Debtor
The Bankruptcy Code encourages service and good suppliers to continue to do business with a company in Chapter 11 by providing that amounts owed for post-petition services and deliveries are eligible to receive administrative claim status if they provide a benefit to the estate, meaning that their claims are paid in full before pre-petition unsecured claims. But how is administrative claim status obtained in a bankruptcy case, and what risks does a service or goods supplier take by continuing to do business with the debtor after commencement of the bankruptcy case?
Judge Craig Goldblatt of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware recently considered the contours of the "benefit to the estate" rule in In re MTE Holdings, (Case No. 19-12269 (CTG)). In an opinion dated June 2, 2021, Goldblatt granted administrative claim status to a consulting service provider and ruled a noninsider third party that provides goods or services to a debtor-in-possession on ordinary commercial terms does not have to prove that receipt of those goods or services led to success of the venture or increased profits for the debtor.
According to the opinion, the debtors were in the oil and gas drilling business. The drilling process required a significant amount of water. The debtors had storage facilities for the wastewater, which must be disposed in accordance with applicable environmental laws. Prior to the bankruptcy case, the debtors decided to expand the capacity of their wastewater disposal facility beyond the level required by the debtors' operations. The debtors planned to charge other oil and gas exploration companies for disposal of their own wastewater at the debtors' facilities.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
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
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.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
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.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
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.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?