Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Is the Use of Third-Party Releases In Bankruptcy Cases Stretched Too Thin?
One of the many powerful tools Chapter 11 provides is the opportunity for a debtor to obtain a discharge of debts through a plan of reorganization. In complex cases, however, debtors often view the discharge as being insufficient to accomplish all of its restructuring goals. Thus, third-party releases are often incorporated into the bankruptcy plan as a means of protecting nondebtor parties from litigation that is directly or even tangentially related to the debtor's business. Over the last several years, the scope and use of such third-party releases appears to have been stretched arguably to the breaking point as demonstrated in the recent and important district court decision in the Ascena case. See, Patterson v. Mahwah Bergen Retail Group, Civ. No. 3:21cv167 (DJN) (E.D. Va. Jan. 13, 2022).
The Ascena bankruptcy case presented facts which are typical to many complex Chapter 11s filed over the last few years. Mahwah Bergen Retail Group, Inc. (f/k/a Ascena Retail Group, Inc.) (Ascena) and affiliated debtors commenced Chapter 11 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on July 23, 2020. The Eastern District of Virginia had become a popular venue to file large retail bankruptcy cases. Immediately following the sale of substantially all of its assets, the debtors filed an amended plan of reorganization.
The plan contained broad releases of claims held by third parties. These releases operated to permanently release and discharge any claim actionable against any debtor, any affiliate of any debtor, and anyone associated with any debtor, if such claim occurred on or before the plan effective date. In connection with the releases, the Bankruptcy Court required the debtors to circulate a notice of nonvoting status to holders of claims subject to the releases. The notice advised recipients that they could opt out of release of their claims by returning a "Release Opt-Out Form," further advising that failure to return the form would result in the claimant being "deemed to have released whatever claims it may have against many other people and entities (including company officers and directors)". The Bankruptcy Court confirmed the debtors' plan containing the releases and entered the confirmation order Feb. 25, 2021, despite objections from plaintiffs in pending securities fraud litigation targeted at Ascena and certain of its former executives.
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
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.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
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
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
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.