Propel your Bankruptcy e-Learning

Two pairs of judges square off to consider (1) whether bankruptcies can be properly filed when a debtor faces a deluge of potential tort claims and (2) whether bankruptcy courts can support plans regarding certain special fee and financing arrangements for debtors. RESOLVED: That a bankruptcy is filed in good faith where the debtor is not otherwise in immediate financial distress and appears to have the liquidity to pay its creditors in full, but where the case is filed because of the debtor is a defendant facing a deluge of tort claims that could at some point threaten the debtor’s business and where the debtor believes that the mechanism for liquidating those claims through a trust created under a plan of reorganization will be fairer and better for all parties than the results that would otherwise obtain in the tort system. RESOLVED: That a bankruptcy court may approve a DIP financing agreement that incorporates the milestones set out in a restructuring support agreement, that provides that (a) the debtors will propose a plan that provides specified treatment to the Supporting Parties, which treatment is materially the same as the plan provides to similarly situated creditors; (b) obligates the Supporting Parties to vote in favor of the debtor’s plan and to vote against any competing plan; and (c) provides that the Supporting Parties (and only the supporting parties) will provide exit financing to the Reorganized Debtors, at rates and fees that exceed prevailing market terms.

This panel will discuss pre-appeal considerations, final or interlocutory orders, stays pending appeal, perfecting an appeal, appellate briefs, and direct appeals to circuit courts.

Filing a bankruptcy petition is not always a viable option or the best solution. This panel will explore alternative avenues for distressed companies, including receiverships, assignments for the benefit of creditors and Article 9 foreclosures, as well as when a bankruptcy filing is the most effective tool. Learn what factors should be considered in evaluating the various options and what the benefits and drawbacks of each alternative are.

This panel will identify recent examples of chapter 11 plans confirmed within the Ninth Circuit that contained third-party releases despite longstanding precedent in the Ninth Circuit prohibiting those releases outside of the asbestos context. The panelists also will describe the types of releases confirmed, as well as how the plan proponents were able to include the releases.