Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
370 results for '* topic:"Bankruptcy"' You can use Search Constraints to get even better search results
Publication Date: 2018-06-27
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Construction
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Sontchi
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Potter Anderson & Corroon LLP for plaintiff
for defendant: Adam Hiller, Ian M. Williamson, and Jordan B. Segal for defendant.
Case Number: D68196
Bankruptcy court determined that it had "related to" subject matter jurisdiction due to defendant's possible indemnification claim and plaintiff's attempt to pierce the corporate veil.
Publication Date: 2018-06-20
Practice Area: Bankruptcy | Corporate Governance
Industry:
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Gross
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68186
In this adversary proceeding, the bankruptcy court determined that the trustee failed to allege claims for cor-porate waste, but the court granted and denied various parts of defendants' motions to dismiss the fraud, breach of fiduciary and fraudulent transfer claims.
Publication Date: 2018-06-06
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Stark
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68166
Bankruptcy court was not obligated to make findings of fact and law for district court's final adjudication upon denial of defendant's summary judgment motion on core claim in adversary proceeding, since denial did not constitute a final adjudication outside of the bankruptcy court's constitutional authority.
Publication Date: 2018-06-06
Practice Area: Bankruptcy | Civil Procedure
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Silverstein
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68170
The bankruptcy court had subject matter jurisdiction over this core proceeding, and neither transfer nor abstention were warranted because defendant's counterclaims would be resolved in the context of the bankruptcy claims allowance process.
Publication Date: 2018-05-30
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Legal Services
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Walrath
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Ronald S. Gellert, Joseph L. Steinfeld, Kara E. Casteel, Bethany J. Rubis and Edward E. Neiger for RCS Creditor Trust
for defendant: Adam G. Landis, James S. Green, Jr. and Michael L. Cook, for Schulte Roth & Zabel.
Case Number: D68162
After weighing the factors regarding transfer of this proceeding for avoidance of pre-petition transfers, the court concluded that the case should remain in the district where the underlying bankruptcy case was filed.
Law Journal Press | Digital Book
Authors:
View this BookView more book results for the query "*"
Publication Date: 2018-05-16
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry:
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Judge: Judge Mariani
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68145
Payments during the bankruptcy preference period did not qualify as being in the ordinary course of business because the payment terms had changed, and the bankruptcy court had adequate information from which to calculate a creditors new value defense.
Publication Date: 2018-05-02
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Investments and Investment Advisory | Technology Media and Telecom
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Shannon
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael R. Nestor, Peter M. Gihuly and Andrew R. Gray for Jumio Acquisition; Adam G. Landis, Shanti M. Katona and George W. Shuster, Jr. for debtors and liquidating trustee
for defendant: Matthew B. Heimann, Charles A. Stanziale, Jr. Steven A. Beckelman, Jeffrey T. Testa and Kate Roggio Buck for Bloso Investments; Leo D. Plotkin, Andrew John Roth-Moore, Christopher C. Cooke, Michael G. Busenkell, Bryan L. Bates, Charles E. Dorkey, III, Thomas F. Driscoll, III, Ian C. Bifferato, Kimberly Gattuso, Todd Charles Schiltz, Michael L. Bernstein, William P. Bowden and “J” Jackson Shrum for remaining parties.
Case Number: D68121
Bankruptcy court determined that a partys state court claims were derivative rather than direct claims, and therefore they belonged to the liquidating trustee.
Publication Date: 2018-05-02
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Manufacturing
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Shannon
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Patrick A. Jackson for Worthington Cryogenics, LLC
for defendant: Derek J. Baker and Emily K. Devan for debtors.
Case Number: D68125
Purchaser of debtors assets was not entitled to reformation of contract based on mutual mistake because purchaser was a sophisticated party and failed to exercise due diligence.
Publication Date: 2018-05-02
Practice Area: Bankruptcy | Native American Law
Industry: Financial Services and Banking
Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
Judge: District Judge Andrews
Attorneys: For plaintiff:
for defendant:
Case Number: D68120
Bankruptcy code did not abrogate Native American tribal sovereign immunity, where there was no express reference to Indian or Native American tribes in the bankruptcy codes immunity waiver provision.
Publication Date: 2018-05-02
Practice Area: Bankruptcy
Industry: Legal Services
Court: U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge: Judge Sontchi
Attorneys: For plaintiff: Mark M Billion and Erin J. Kennedy for plaintiff
for defendant: Marcos A. Ramos and Joseph Barsalona II for defendant.
Case Number: D68123
Bankruptcy trustee was precluded from amending a complaint where the parties had previously entered a stipulated dismissal of the subject claims, and revival prejudiced defendant.
Legal Speak is a weekly podcast that makes sense of what’s happening in the legal industry.
1 minute read