Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Another Appellate Court Vacates A Bankruptcy Court Contempt Judgment
The Southern District of New York vacated a bankruptcy court's judgment holding a debtor's business competitor (C) "in contempt for violation of the [Bankruptcy Code's] automatic stay … and assessing sanctions" of $19.2 million. In re Windstream Holdings, Inc., 2022 WL 5245633, *1 (2) (S.D.N.Y. Oct 6, 2022). The bankruptcy court had erroneously sanctioned C for a "literally false and intentionally misleading advertising campaign" to lure subscribers away from the debtor, mistakenly reasoning that C's advertisements violated the automatic stay by suggesting the debtor was going out of business. Id. According to the district court, though, C's "advertisements did not violate the … stay, and, in any case, there was a fair ground of doubt whether they did so." Id. at *3.
Relevance
Appellate courts have not been afraid to overturn bankruptcy court sanctions. In re Gravel, 6 F. 4th 503, 508, 512-13 (2d Cir. 2021) (2-1) (bankruptcy court's punitive sanctions order vacated and reversed; "… a contempt order is warranted only where the party has notice of the order, the order is clear and unambiguous, and the proof of noncompliance is clear and convincing"; "… a bankruptcy court cannot hold a party in contempt for violating an order that is subject to varying interpretations.") cert denied. __ U.S. __ (June 13, 2022); Beckhart v. Newrez LLC, 31 F.4th 274, 275, 278 (4th Cir. 2022) ("neither the bankruptcy court nor the district court applied" the current standard for holding "a creditor in civil contempt" for violating a "confusing" Chapter 11 confirmation order; "any sanction that may ultimately be imposed must be supported – both in type and in amount — by a sufficient evidentiary record."); In re DeGennaro, III, 2020 WL 7231945,*9 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 8, 2020) (bankruptcy court sanctions vacated because of an abuse of discretion; order not "clear and unambiguous"; no "clear and convincing evidence of non-compliance" with order "whose terms cannot now be created"; no willful compliance with unclear order; no advance warning of possible contempt sanction; sanctions imposed … too "quickly and without sufficient explanation."). Bankruptcy courts may still sanction parties, but their "contempt power… is narrowly circumscribed." Gravel, 6 F. 4th at 511, quoting Perez v. Danbury Hosp., 347 F.3d 419, 423 (2d Cir. 2003).
The Facts
The debtor and C "compete[d] … in providing residential and commercial voice and data communication services …." Windstream, 2022 WL 5245633, at *1. After the debtor sought Chapter 11 relief in March, 2019, C "launched a direct-mail campaign directed at [the debtor's] customers," noting the bankruptcy, "uncertainty," and offering to "buy-out" the debtor's customers from their contracts with the debtor. According to the bankruptcy court when granting the debtor's motion for summary judgment, C "was liable for violating the automatic stay through its advertising campaign, … an act to control property of the estate, namely, the debtor's customers or contracts with those customers." Id. at *2, relying on Bankruptcy Code (Code) §362(a)(3) (staying acts to "obtain" or "exercise control" over estate property). The bankruptcy court later held a trial on contempt and sanctions; held C "in contempt"; and "sanctioned [C] $19,179,329.45 for [the debtor's] losses …." Id. at *3.
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
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?
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.