No CLE

The bankruptcy judge ruled against you. Now what? Motion to reconsider? Appeal to the district court? Appeal to the (gulp) court of appeals? HELP! This panel of experienced practitioners and judges will help you think through when, and how, to appeal.

When is a tax return not a tax return? Bankruptcy can be very useful when seeking to discharge personal income tax obligations, but if the return has not been filed on time, dischargeability may be in jeopardy. Many courts have addressed this issue and have issued widely divergent views, including the First Circuit’s strict interpretation of what constitutes a tax return as announced by the majority in In re Fahey. This panel will focus on the development of the case law in the First Circuit, the information you must obtain from the taxing authority to determine when a tax return has been filed, what constitutes a return, and strategies to employ in the event that the tax return your client filed is defective and the taxes reported on that return are nondischargeable.

As the 21st century races forward, the use of technology is rapidly changing many aspects of the business and practice of law. This panel will discuss the latest developments in courtroom presentation technology and its use. It will also offer insights into the technologies that attorneys should understand for their practices and businesses.

Presented by the Mediation and Secured Credit Committees

This panel will explore current chapter 11 issues from case inception to exit and will discuss current case law and trends, including nonconventional financing obstacles, the ability of a lender to obtain default interest post-petition, plan-support agreements, structured dismissals, cramdown interest rates, third-party releases and the erosion of the equitable mootness doctrine on appeal.

This panel will explore current chapter 11 issues from case inception to exit and will discuss current case law and trends, including nonconventional financing obstacles, the ability of a lender to obtain default interest post-petition, plan-support agreements, structured dismissals, cramdown interest rates, third-party releases and the erosion of the equitable mootness doctrine on appeal.

This year’s mountainside chat will address recent developments in the requirements for employment of disinterestedness, disclosure and disqualification. It will focus on two recent decisions relating to the extent to which a lack of disinterestedness or the presence of an ethical conflict of one firm member is, or is not, imputed on others within the same firm, and whether there is a difference between the two. The discussion will also address different views expressed by courts on the impact of receipt of a retainer, outstanding obligations for pre-petition services, and the potential for avoidance of pre-petition payments.

This panel will discuss how to make sure management (and the board) plays the role of neutral stakeholder throughout a plan and/ or § 363 process. Can the same board and management team truly represent the interests of stakeholders of BOTH a corporate parent and its subsidiaries? What if there are dozens of affiliates whose creditors have disparate interests? Why is the issue of corporate separateness (and related conflicts) overlooked in some multiple-debtor cases, but addressed in others? What are the pros and cons of various tools for addressing potential conflicts? Who should investigate when issues are raised about the validity of intercompany debt, the reasonableness of cost allocations, the ownership of intellectual property and the potential for fraudulent conveyance claims among debtors? Examples discussed may include Nortel, Caesars, EFH, Lehman, Tribune and others.