LeClairRyan, Lender Clash Over Converting Defunct Firm's Bankruptcy to Chapter 7
Attorneys for the dissolving firm and its lender will square off in court Thursday over a U.S. trustee's motion seeking to appoint a liquidator.
September 25, 2019 at 04:16 PM
4 minute read
A federal bankruptcy judge is poised to hear arguments Thursday about whether dissolution proceedings for now-defunct LeClairRyan should be handled by a court-appointed liquidator.
The firm's primary lender, ABL Alliance LLLP, has backed a motion by the acting U.S. trustee for the region to move the law firm from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7, pointing to slower-than-anticipated collections since LeClairRyan filed for bankruptcy at the start of the month.
LeClairRyan, however, says that Chapter 11 remains the most efficient way to handle its liquidation, arguing that collections have picked up since the first week after the filing.
"The debtor has had a successful start in collecting revenue, reducing expenses and fulfilling its duties through this chapter 11 case," a team of attorneys for Hunton Andrews Kurth argued on behalf of the firm in a filing Monday.
The firm's initial Chapter 11 filing, in Virginia's Eastern District, indicated it owed $6.8 million out of an initial $15 million loan to ABL, an entity linked to lender Virginia Commercial Finance.
ABL has the first priority of two secured creditors, followed by ULX Partners, the joint venture the firm launched with UnitedLex to handle support services in 2018. Owed $8 million according to the Chapter 11 filing, UnitedLex has been silent during the bankruptcy process.
U.S. Trustee John Fitzgerald III, the acting trustee for Virginia, the District of Columbia and three other southeastern states, made the initial argument for moving the matter to Chapter 7 now, contending in a filing earlier this month that there is no question that the conversion is an inevitability. LeClairRyan now exists in name only, after its members voted to dissolve the firm in late July.
He said that a court-appointed liquidator would immediately be able "to stop the hemorrhaging, make decisions about what contracts to assume or reject, and start paving the road to recoveries from avoidance actions."
On the other hand, waiting would be worse, Fitzgerald argued.
"Delaying conversion would only saddle the estate with additional administrative expenses and render the transition to a Chapter 7 harder as the few employees left will continue to leave leaving the trustee with little to no historical knowledge or support," he said.
ABL then came out in support of the conversion in a filing Monday, saying it would not consent to letting the firm continuing to use cash on hand to support its unwinding after Thursday.
"The sole reason ABLA consented to the Debtor's use of its cash collateral at the outset of this case as a Chapter 11 proceeding was the perceived benefit from the continuity in collection of the accounts receivable and the apparatus that was in place to do so," the lender's attorneys with McGuireWoods argued.
That has not actually been the case, they continued, pointing to the firm's second weekly report from Sept. 15. That showed LeClairRyan was 28% behind its budgeted cash collections and that expenses exceeded the budget by 20%.
"The unfortunate reality is that cumulative collections have faltered to unacceptable levels despite continuity with the debtor-in-possession in control under chapter 11," ABL continued, adding that excessive and highly compensated staffing, inflated IT expenses and personnel inefficiencies were driving up expenses.
LeClairRyan's response, which followed ABL's filing but was directed to the U.S. trustee's initial motion, said that collections have been catching up to projects and that it has been able to reduce its debt to the lender by $1.8 million since the bankruptcy process began. But the firm did say that it was engaged in discussions with ABL and representatives of the U.S. trustee aimed at reaching an agreement for the next steps for the dissolution.
Also at stake in Thursday's hearings is the firm's plans for disposing of inactive client files that have not moved with its former attorneys to their new firms. LeClairRyan is looking for permission to destroy all remaining files after providing clients a 90-day window to respond.
LeClairRyan's longtime IT provider, Proxios, has argued that the procedure outlined by the firm is incomplete and, among other failings, might obligate it to negotiate with or obtain payment from the firm's former clients to either retrieve or store their files.
|Read More
LeClairRyan Bankruptcy Could Keep Creditors, Partners Busy for Years
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFrom ‘Deep Sadness’ to Little Concern, Gaetz’s Nomination Draws Sharp Reaction From Lawyers
7 minute readDechert 'Spark Tank' Competition Encourages Firmwide Innovation Focus
Akerman Opens Charlotte Office With Focus on Renewable Energy, Data Center Practices
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Squire Patton Boggs Associate Among Those Killed in String of Methanol Poisonings
- 2Womans Suit Alleging Negligence to Sex Trafficking by Hotel Tossed by Federal Judge
- 3More Big Law Firms Rush to Match Associate Bonuses, While Some Offer Potential for Even More
- 4OpenAI, NYTimes Counsel Quarrel Over Erased OpenAI Training Data
- 5Saying Your Goodbyes—Ethical Obligations When Transitioning to a New Firm
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250