Skip to main content

Page Banner(Taxonomy)

judge bernstein

In re Vargas Realty Enters.

Ruling
Reargument of finding that four debtor corporations each owned "single asset real estate" denied.
Procedural posture

Debtor corporations filed petitions under chapter 11 and the court ordered joint administration of their bankruptcy estates. In a prior ruling, the court held that each debtor owned property that met the definition of "single asset real estate" under 11 U.S.C.S. § 101(51B). The debtors filed a motion for permission to reargue the court's ruling.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Vargas Realty Enters. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on July 23, 2009 , LexisNexis #0909-071

In re T.A.T. Prop.

Ruling
Confirmation of chapter 11 plan denied as not feasible and case dismissed as centering around a two-party dispute better resolved by foreclosure.
Procedural posture

Debtor, a New York real estate grantor trust, filed a petition under chapter 11 on October 14, 2005, just prior to the effective date of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, and proposed several plans for reorganizing its business. A mortgagee filed an objection to an amended plan the debtor filed on May 8, 2008.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re T.A.T. Prop. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on February 20, 2009 , LexisNexis #0509-139

In re New 118th Inc.

Ruling
Preconfirmation transfer of real property that was necessary to plan was tax exempt where delivery of deed would take place after confirmation.
Procedural posture

The City of New York filed objections to the chapter 11 trustee's claim to tax exemption under 11 U.S.C.S. § 1146(a) to the transfer of some $ 54 million in real property from the debtors' estates to a third-part purchaser, under a plan confirmed under 11 U.S.C.S. § 1129, where the sale was agreed to pre-confirmation, but closed after confirmation and where the transfer was necessary to the consummation of the plan.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re New 118th Inc. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on January 09, 2009 , LexisNexis #0209-054

In re Payroll Express Corp.

Ruling
Unclaimed dividends could not be used to satisfy judgment where corporate debtor's case had been dismissed without plan confirmation.
Procedural posture

Several judgment creditors assigned their money judgment against two individual chapter 11 debtors to an assignee. The assignee thereafter filed an application in the court, seeking to enforce the judgment against the unclaimed dividends remaining in the bankruptcy estate of a chapter 11 corporate debtor. The assignee claimed the corporate debtor and the individual debtors were alter egos.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Payroll Express Corp. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on November 24, 2008 , LexisNexis #0209-065

Joremi Enters. v. Hershkowitz (In re New 118th LLC)

Ruling
Guarantee dispute remanded pursuant to mandatory abstention once established that the matter would not affect administration.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff investors brought an action in state court against defendants: debtor, three individuals, et al. After that court ordered relief against the affiliated debtors, plaintiffs removed the action to district court which referred it to the instant court. Plaintiffs assigned the proceeds of their claims to debtors'estates, and filed an amended complaint, which dropped all defendants other than the individuals, one of which moved to remand.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Joremi Enters. v. Hershkowitz (In re New 118th LLC) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on November 13, 2008 , LexisNexis #1208-091

In re Ridgemour Meyer Props. LLC

Ruling
Chapter 11 trustee appointed for cause due to debtor's concealment of property transfer.
Procedural posture

A bankruptcy debtor and its joint venturer disputed whether to continue their venture to erect a high-rise building on property contributed by the debtor, and an arbitrator determined that the debtor would control the property pending dissolution of the joint venture and a determination of the parties'rights and obligations. The debtor then filed its bankruptcy petition, and the joint venturer moved for appointment of a trustee.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Ridgemour Meyer Props. LLC Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on November 12, 2008 , LexisNexis #0209-124

Quigley Co. v. Coleman (In re Quigley Co.)

Ruling
"Apparent" manufacturer liability of debtor's parent in asbestos case was covered by channeling injunction.
Procedural posture

A law firm, which represented asbestos claimants that had sued a chapter 11 debtor's non-debtor parent prior to the debtor's petition date, claimed that an amended injunction issued by the court did not enjoin the claims asserted by the claimants that were based on the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 400 (Section 400).

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Quigley Co. v. Coleman (In re Quigley Co.) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on May 15, 2008 , LexisNexis #0708-030

In re Oversight & Control Commn of Avanzit S.A.

Ruling
Application for recognition of foreing proceeding granted.
Procedural posture

After a foreign telecommunications company filed a suspension, or insolvency, proceeding in a foreign country, a foreign bank terminated its agreement to acquire contractual credits from the company and set off the amount it paid the company against amounts allegedly owed. An oversight commission in the foreign proceeding applied for recognition of the foreign proceeding, and the bank moved for summary judgment of dismissal.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Oversight & Control Commn of Avanzit S.A. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on April 18, 2008 , LexisNexis #0508-092

In re Oversight & Control Commn of Avanzit S.A.

Ruling
Foreign proceeding in which court continued to oversee plan after approval was "pending" and could be recognized as a foreign main proceeding.
Procedural posture

After a foreign telecommunications company filed a suspension, or insolvency, proceeding in a foreign country, a foreign bank terminated its agreement to acquire contractual credits from the company and set off the amount it paid the company against amounts allegedly owed. An oversight commission in the foreign proceeding applied for recognition of the foreign proceeding, and the bank moved for summary judgment of dismissal.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Oversight & Control Commn of Avanzit S.A. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on April 18, 2008 , LexisNexis #0508-022

In re Schick

Ruling
Court refused to reopen case to administer undisclosed asset due to debtor's failure to file schedules while case was open.
Procedural posture

The individual debtor in this involuntary chapter 11 case moved to reopen it and compel his former trustee to administer a heretofore undisclosed asset, or else, abandon it.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Schick Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on March 19, 2008 , LexisNexis #0508-061