It has been nearly two years since Bernie Madoff was arrested in his Manhattan home and criminally charged with a multi-billion dollar securities fraud scheme operated through the investment advisory unit of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (BLMIS).
What happens when a chapter 7 trustee brings an action to avoid a prepetition transfer of garnished funds as preference and tries to recover such transfer not only from the judgment creditor but also its attorney? Here’s an example. George Washington retains Law Firm to prosecute John Adams for an injury that Washington suffered on Adams’ property.
On June 14, 2010, the joint liquidators of Fairfield Sentry Ltd.—the largest Madoff “feeder fund”—filed a chapter 15 petition with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York seeking recognition of the fund’s British Virgin Islands (BVI)-based insolvency proceedings.
One of the by-products of the Lehman insolvency is an increased focus on client money protection. The decision of Briggs J in the Lehman case concerning client moneys, reported as Lehman Brothers International (Europe) (in administration) v. CRC Credit Fund Limited & Ors, [2009] EWHC 3228, highlights a number of deficiencies in the current regime.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision may be most widely known as the originator of the “Basel Capital Standards,” “Basel II” and “Basel [III].” They provide guiding principles for capital for credit institutions (principally deposit-taking institutions) and related actors in the organized and regulated financial markets. The committee traces its origins largely to bank failures.
Although a claim involving only goods sold to the debtor qualifies as an administrative expense under § 503(b)(9)[1] of the Bankruptcy Code, courts are split as to whether, and to what extent, this section covers so-called “hybrid” claims—those involving both goods and services transactions.
The Federal District Court of New Jersey recently examined the reasonableness of professional fees to a prevailing party arising from lengthy litigation involving clean-up cost allocations of a New Jersey Superfund site. In reducing the prevailing party’s fee application, the Court, in United States v.
The following question was recently posed to the South Carolina Ethics Advisory Committee (the “Committee”): As part of a confidential settlement agreement that does not require court approval, can the settling defendant require the plaintiff’s lawyer to not identify or use the defendant’s name for “commercial or commercially-related publicity purposes,” even if the matter is of public record a
Just when you think you’ve finally learned Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article 9, the Uniform Law Commission (ULC) proposes changes. The ULC and the American Law Institute (ALI) promulgated Revised Article 9 (RA9) in 1998, and it was enacted by all states by 2001. From 2001-08, RA9 seemed to work fairly well, but some practitioners and judges nevertheless found ambiguities.
Upon a chapter 11 filing, that fictional entity, the debtor in possession (DIP), is born.
