Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A forensic accountant, litigation consultant or a business valuation expert is often tasked with the prospect of "interpreting" clauses in an agreement from a financial point of view without expressing a legal opinion. In addition, the expert may be required to then determine the financial consequences of that interpretation. Those results are often the subject of controversy when adversarial positions are posited by competing experts or when challenged in a court of law.
One aspect of the dispute, and one with significant consequences, centered around the term indubitable equivalent value for a Class 5 creditor in the context of a debtor's fifth amended Chapter 11 plan and objection to confirmation filed by creditor. The U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division (the court) opined on that issue (Spiderman Scott Mulholland and Tina Marie Foley Mulholland Debtors, Case No. 3:18-bk-04096-JAF, Chapter 11, Jan. 14, 2022).
By way of background, in 2018, the debtors (husband and wife) filed a voluntary petition for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The creditor had filed a secured proof of claim pursuant to a state-court judgment in 2018 against the debtors. The judgment against the debtors was over $4.6 million and increased to $5.1 million in 2020 with post-judgment interest. The bankruptcy estate included 100% of the stock in an operating entity that provided remediation construction services. The debtor husband was the owner, key person and "rainmaker" as well as influencer for the business. The creditor, the daughter of the debtors, was in her mid-30s with no business experience and no involvement in the company.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.