Opinion ID: 4517867
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: issues

Text: There are four issues we need to address; each concerns the use of the §547(c)(1) defense. The first is whether new value was provided by the release of Wells Fargo’s junior liens where a senior lienholder voluntarily released its liens for less than full payment of its debt. Second, whether Wells Fargo provided new value to the Debtor when the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), a secured creditor senior to Wells Fargo, was paid from the proceeds of a sale of the Debtor’s assets and voluntarily released its liens. Third, whether a $100,000 payment made by the Debtor to Wells Fargo one day before a sale closing was intended to be a contemporaneous exchange. Fourth, whether Wells Fargo’s release of claims against Phillips 66 and KCRC resulted in new value to the Debtor intended by the parties to be a contemporaneous exchange. In each instance, we see no error in the bankruptcy court’s application of §547(c)(1).