Audio

The panel will address, in an interactive format, the equitable decisions rendered by courts that may modify, diminish or impact secured claims or secured creditors’ pre-petition agreements. For example, the program will cover the limitations on the post-petition effects of a security interest based on the equities of the case, surcharge issues and § 363(k) cause to preclude credit-bidding, as well as other equitable theories.

This panel will discuss the creative ways that debtors, committees and settling parties are utilizing channeling injunctions, bar orders and settlements to curtail continued litigation to facilitate settlements in bankruptcy. In particular, the panelists will cover the applicable standards and the benefits that can be obtained for a bankruptcy estate and all settling parties.

As if the Bankruptcy Code doesn’t give us enough to ponder, bankruptcy practitioners must consider the impact of the U.S. Tax Code on the decision-making process. This session will address the Internal Revenue Code “section 1398 short year” election and separate entity rules, discharge of tax claims, cancellation of debt (COD) income, and tax issues arising from mortgage modification, foreclosure, and transfer or abandonment of property.

There are many changes occurring in consumer bankruptcy law. Find out the latest developments in your neighborhood and around the country.

“Getting to Yes” in the language of the Fisher and Ury book, has become part of the common lexicon. This program will focus on negotiation techniques in the context of a bankruptcy. After an analysis of negotiation techniques applicable to the world of insolvency, experienced practitioners will relay war stories and examples of tactics that have worked, and those that have not.

This panel will first review the scope and types of coverage actually found in a typical E&O Policy and D&O Policy. Second, the Panel will discuss how claims are made under these policies with emphasis on how to assert or plead a claim so as to preserve coverage. Third, the Panel will discuss the law governing the treatment of such policies as “property of the estate” and finally, they will review the treatment and possible priority of claims that are asserted and adjudicated against the Debtor prepetition.

Was the deal ill-conceived? Was the borrower undercapitalized/overleveraged? Was it the victim of intervening circumstances and unforeseeable events? In today’s covenant-light world, more financial players and operating companies’ owners are availing themselves of relatively accessible credit facilities to cash in on the perceived value of entities with attractive balance sheets. But what happens if the company later fails and ends up in bankruptcy? Are redeeming shareholders really supposed to be the guarantors of the deal’s success?

Individual chapter 11 cases pose a number of thorny legal and practical problems for the bankruptcy practitioner. While individual chapter 11 cases contain many elements of corporate chapter 11 and chapter 13 cases, they do not fit comfortably in either chapter. Following the enactment of BAPCPA, courts have struggled to strike the appropriate balance between the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code intended for corporations and those intended for human beings. The result is substantial uncertainty for debtors and creditors alike. This session will explore: Does the absolute priority rule apply to individual chapter 11 debtors? May creditors commence an involuntary chapter 11 case against an individual? May individual chapter 11 debtors pay their living expenses in the ordinary course of business, or is notice and a hearing required? What are the advantages and disadvantages for debtors and creditors in an individual chapter 11 case as compared to a corporate chapter 11 case or a chapter 13 case?

This program will address ethical issues unique to the practice of bankruptcy law. With the increasing use of social networking sites, such as Facebook and Linked In, what ethical issues arise? What constitutes advertising and, therefore, under ethical restrictions must be disclosed as such? What constitutes client solicitation and is therefore prohibited? In related topics, how far can an attorney go in attempting to obtain committee representation, and what crosses the ethical boundaries? Finally, what duties do lawyers owe to the court and to the profession if they learn of somebody's crossing the line in any of those activities? Does it matter how they learn of them ("Facebook stalking")?