Source: https://opinions.abi.org/3rd-circuit/delaware/judge-carey?page=8
Timestamp: 2020-02-26 23:38:22
Document Index: 290140010

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 363', '§ 1129', '§ 1123', '§ 1129', '§ 105', '§ 365', '§ 503', '§ 504', '§ 547']

Judge Carey | Page 9 | Collier Case Updates
Home Jurisdiction 3rd Circuit (1312) Delaware (410) 3rd Circuit Delaware Judge Carey
In re HRP Myrtle Beach Holdings LLC
After the debtors filed voluntary petitions for relief under chapter 11, they moved for an order authorizing them to obtain postpetition financing pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 363 and 364, granting senior-priority liens and super-priority claims to the postpetition secured lenders, and authorizing them to use cash collateral and obtain emergency postpetition loans. The debtors also requested adequate protection for pre-petition secured lenders.
Read more about In re HRP Myrtle Beach Holdings LLC
Debtors in possession granted ability to obtain superpriority senior secured postpetition financing and to use cash collateral.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re HRP Myrtle Beach Holdings LLC. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Commercial case opionion summary, case decided on September 29,2008, LexisNexis #1208-039
Chapter 11 debtors and the creditors' committee sought approval of the debtors' plan. An ad hoc committee of the debtors' Deferred Compensation Plan and/or Supplemental Executive Retirement/Savings Plan objected to confirmation, arguing that the plan provided for an impermissible substantive consolidation of the debtors in violation of 11 U.S.C.S. § 1129(a), and the plan did not comply with 11 U.S.C.S. § 1123(a)(4), as required by § 1129(a)(1).
Formation of three groups of affiliated debtors and multi-debtor claim protocol was not an impermissible consolidation.
Commercial case opionion summary, case decided on July 02,2008, LexisNexis #0808-049
Debtors filed a motion pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 105(a) and 362(a) for an order enforcing the automatic stay against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and granting related relief. The debtors asked the court to enter an order directing the IRS to release a tax refund to the debtors. The IRS opposed the motion, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction to consider it.
Section 106 does not provide independent basis for debtor to obtain release of IRS refund.
Commercial case opionion summary, case decided on February 14,2008, LexisNexis #0308-071
In re Touch Am. Holdings Inc.
Read more about In re Touch Am. Holdings Inc.
Former officers and directors of bankruptcy debtors filed proofs of claim for reimbursement, indemnification, and contribution based on two civil actions against the officers and directors for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud. The trustee under the debtors' confirmed plan moved for summary judgment of subordination with regard to one action and disallowance with regard to the second action.
Claim of debtor's former officers and directors under ERISA were subject to subordination and actions for indemnification were subject to disallowance.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Touch Am. Holdings Inc.. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Commercial case opionion summary, case decided on January 18,2008, LexisNexis #0208-135
Read more about In re Exide Techs.
Creditor, a retired employee of the debtor, moved for the enforcement of a selective executive retirement agreement plan ("SERP"), under which the debtor still owed him seven of the total of ten payments. The debtor objected to the relief requested, arguing the SERP contract was not assumable under 11 U.S.C. § 365, because it was not an executory contract.
Selective executive retirement agreement was not an executory contract and not subject to assumption.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Exide Techs.. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Commercial case opionion summary, case decided on December 05,2007, LexisNexis #1207-127
In re Summit Metals Inc.
Read more about In re Summit Metals Inc.
A debtor filed for relief under chapter 11. A consultant and an attorney filed applications for the allowance of fees and expenses as administrative expenses in the proceeding, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 503(b). The chapter 11 trustee, the U.S. trustee, and the committee of unsecured creditors filed objections.
Consultant and attorney denied administrative expense fees for services except for attorney's fees as chair of creditors'committee.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Summit Metals Inc.. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Commercial case opionion summary, case decided on December 04,2007, LexisNexis #1207-129
In re Winstar Communs.
Read more about In re Winstar Communs.
The law firm and its consulting firm, both retained to complete commercial litigation on behalf of the chapter 7 trustee, moved for the authority to enter into an agreement with a lender to "hedge" a portion of their anticipated contingency fees for the litigation, which was on appeal. The United States trustee filed an objection to the motion, claiming the agreement violated the prohibition of fee sharing of 11 U.S.C. § 504.
Agreement between law firm, consulting firm and lender to "hedge" contingency fees in litigation for chapter 7 trustee denied as "fee sharing."
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Winstar Communs.. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Commercial case opionion summary, case decided on December 04,2007, LexisNexis #1207-131
In re Student Fin. Corp.
Read more about In re Student Fin. Corp.
Movant, the chapter 7 trustee, sought an order granting summary judgment against claimant creditor, who had moved to compel debtor to assume or reject a lease for a telephone system, to compel immediate payment of certain rent and lease obligations or, in the alternative, to provide adequate protection. The creditor also sought relief from the automatic stay.
Lease on which debtor had been current had not terminated prior to filing date so that creditor could make claim for rejection damages.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Student Fin. Corp.. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Commercial case opionion summary, case decided on November 28,2007, LexisNexis #0108-025
Broadway Advisors LLC v. Hipro Elecs. Inc. (In re Gruppo Antico Inc.)
Read more about Broadway Advisors LLC v. Hipro Elecs. Inc. (In re Gruppo Antico Inc.)
Defendant filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings in chapter 11 debtor's adversary proceeding, which alleged that transfers made by debtor to defendant within 90 days prior to the bankruptcy petition date were avoidable as preferences pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 547(b) and 550.
"Mere conduit" defense to avoidance applied to entity that forwarded debtor's payments to the company it serviced.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Broadway Advisors LLC v. Hipro Elecs. Inc. (In re Gruppo Antico Inc.). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member