Skip to main content

Page Banner(Taxonomy)

judge peck

Bank of America v. Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc. (In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.)

Ruling
Setoff by bank of funds in debtor's overdraft security account against unrelated debts violated stay.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff clearing bank brought an adversary proceeding against defendant bankruptcy debtor, a large securities broker, seeking a declaration that the bank properly set off funds in a security account for overdrafts against unrelated debts of the debtor, or that retroactive relief from the automatic bankruptcy stay was warranted. The bank and the debtor cross-moved for summary judgment.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Bank of America v. Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc. (In re Lehman Bros. Holdings 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 November 16, 2010 , LexisNexis #1210-054

In re Lehman Bros. Holdings

Ruling
Pro se creditor's claims disallowed given lack of evidence of debtor's legal responsibility for investment losses.
Procedural posture

In this jointly administered chapter 11 case, debtors sought to knock out multiple proofs of claims filed by a pro se claimant.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Lehman Bros. Holdings 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 10, 2010 , LexisNexis #1210-110

6050 Grant LLC v. Hanson (In re Hanson)

Ruling
Motion to alter of amend determination of nondischargeability denied given totality of circumstances.
Procedural posture

In the court's Memorandum Opinion dated May 10, 2010 (the Opinion), the court found that a debt in the sum of $93,461 owed by defendant debtor to plaintiff creditor was nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 523(a)(2)(A). Two weeks after entry of the Opinion, debtor filed the instant motion to alter or amend the Opinion. The creditor opposed the motion.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of 6050 Grant LLC v. Hanson (In re Hanson) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on October 05, 2010 , LexisNexis #1210-118

In re Value City Holdings Inc.

Ruling
Debtor's attorneys' compensation could not be tied to amount of recovery.
Procedural posture

The United States Trustee (UST) objected to final fee applications submitted by a law firm as counsel for a chapter 11 debtor, by the counsel for the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, and by other applicants (together, the professionals). The UST recommended either a 10 percent reduction in fees or a 10 percent holdback on payment pending distributions to unsecured creditors as contemplated in the debtor's plan.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Value City Holdings 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 September 22, 2010 , LexisNexis #1010-075

In re JSC BTA Bank

Ruling
Ongoing Swiss arbitration did not violate the stay ordered when an action the debtor filed in Kazakhstan was recognized as a foreign main proceeding.
Procedural posture

The bankruptcy court issued an order in March 2010 which recognized an action that debtor, a foreign bank, filed in the Specialized Financial Court of Almaty City, Republic of Kazakhstan, as a foreign main proceeding under chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. In July 2010, the debtor's representative asked the court to issue an order holding the Swiss branch of a French bank in contempt for violating the court's order and staying arbitration.

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

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on August 23, 2010 , LexisNexis #0910-062

Securities Investor Protection Corp. v. Lehman Bros.

Ruling
Safe harbor provision did not alter Securities Investor Protection Act principal that customer net equity claims are determined as of filing date.
Procedural posture

The trustee for the liquidation of the debtor, pursuant to the Securities Investor Protection Act (SIPA), 15 U.S.C.S. § 78aaa et seq., moved for an order upholding a determination as to the claim of a customer of the debtor, and moved to overrule the customer's objection to that determination. The issue concerned the effective date for determining the closing of certain short positions in the customer's prime brokerage account with the debtor.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Securities Investor Protection Corp. v. Lehman Bros. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on June 01, 2010 , LexisNexis #0810-025

In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.

Ruling
Creditors who did not file timely proofs of claim due to ordinary negligence were not entitled to enlargement of bar date.
Procedural posture

Movants, seven individual creditors, each of whom missed the bar date for filing claims against the debtor, sought relief in the form of enlargement of the bar date order under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006(b)(1), due to excusable neglect.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Lehman Bros. Holdings 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 May 20, 2010 , LexisNexis #0710-101

In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.

Ruling
Creditor ordered to turn over funds held pursuant to master credit swap agreement.
Procedural posture

Movant debtors sought an order enforcing the automatic stay and compelling the payment of certain funds held by respondent creditor in a general deposit account. The debtors asserted that the creditor could not exercise a setoff under 11 U.S.C.S. § 553 or the exceptions under 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 560(a) and 561(a), and that its freeze of the debtors' funds violated the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C.S. § 362.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Lehman Bros. Holdings 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 May 05, 2010 , LexisNexis #0710-056

In re Japan Airlines Corp.

Ruling
Debtor airline's Japan reorganization recognized as foreign main proceeding.
Procedural posture

Pending was the Verified Petition for Recognition and Chapter 15 relief seeking (a) recognition of the Foreign Representative as the "foreign representative" as defined in 11 U.S.C.S. § 101(24) of debtors, and (b) recognition of debtors' reorganization proceedings under Japanese law currently pending before the Tokyo District Court, Civil Department No. 8 (the Japan Proceeding) as a foreign main proceeding pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 1515, 1517.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Japan Airlines 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 February 17, 2010 , LexisNexis #0610-063

Lehman Bros. Special Fin. Inc. v. BNY Corporate Tr. Servs. (In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.)

Ruling
Swap agreement provision calling for shift in debtor's priority in event of default was an unenforceable ipso facto clause.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff bankruptcy debtor brought an adversary proceeding against defendant trustee of a multi-issuer secured obligation program which held collateral for the benefit of a note-holder and the debtor as a counter-party under swap agreements, seeking a declaration that the debtor's priority in the collateral did not transfer to the note-holder due to the bankruptcy of the debtor's parent corporation. The debtor moved for summary judgment.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Lehman Bros. Special Fin. Inc. v. BNY Corporate Tr. Servs. (In re Lehman Bros. Holdings 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 25, 2010 , LexisNexis #0210-112