Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The Role of Third-Party Releases In Successful Chapter 11 Reorganizations
For nearly three decades, courts have wrestled with whether and to what extent the U.S. Bankruptcy Code authorizes non-debtor, third-party releases in a Chapter 11 plan of reorganization. The results over that time have yielded continuing confusion and uncertainty. While three of the 11 Circuit Courts are united in disallowing third-party releases entirely, the other eight provide separate justifications for allowing them, and their differing standards are often disjointedly applied. Although such releases are supposed to apply only in "rare and unique" cases, as one judge observed, "almost every proposed Chapter 11 Plan that I receive includes proposed releases." In re Aegean Marine Petroleum Network, 599 B.R. 717, 726 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Given the increased frequency of this issue in recent cases and the continued uncertainty over when third-party releases can be properly granted under a Chapter 11 plan (if at all), we thought it timely to review the current state of the law on the topic and provide an examination of potential ways to resolve the controversy.
This two-part article will examine the role of third-party releases in successful Chapter 11 reorganizations. This part will address the factors considered in each Circuit where such releases have been deemed permissible within the confines of the Bankruptcy Code, evaluate several recent cases highlighting the uncertainty created by the current Circuit split, and consider options for creating a clear, nationwide standard. Part two will evaluate the Circuit Courts' differing consent requirements for third-party releases and whether bankruptcy courts have the constitutional authority to issue final orders granting third-party releases under Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 (2011).
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.
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.
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.
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?