Illinois State Approved Sessions

Nearly two years have passed since Judge Walrath's September 2011 decision in Washington Mutual threatened to drastically alter the landscape of high-level financial restructuring negotiations. Since then, there have been few further developments in the case law to guide would-be participants in such negotiations. This panel will explore the legal and practical implications of obtaining confidential information in the course of restructuring transaction negotiations, including (1) whether the WaMu decision has had any lasting effects, or whether it has been superseded by subsequent events both in the WaMu case itself and in other major restructuring transactions; (2) how principals and professionals can best protect themselves in negotiating confidentiality agreements; and (3) the requirements for effective "cleansing" when settlement negotiations break down.

Are any financial institutions “too big to fail”? Since the financial crisis of 2008, governments, financial institutions, practitioners and academics have debated, proposed and in some instances implemented provisions to reduce the likelihood that a failure by a systemically important financial institution would cause systemic risk. This panel will discuss the failures of U.S. financial institutions and the current and prospective measures to facilitate the resolution of these institutions without transmitting risk to the U.S. financial system.

The issue of "double-dipping", wherein a creditor is able to increase its recovery by multiplying its allowed claim against a particular entity or asserting claims against multiple entities, has been prevalent in a number of recent restructurings, including American Airlines, Lehman Brothers, CIT Group Inc., Smurfit-Stone Container Corp. and AbitibiBowater Inc. This panel will address the concept of "double-dipping", the scenarios under which it arises and their experience in dealing with the issue in various cases.

Consumer

A Preview of upcoming Supreme Court bankruptcy cases, featuring ABI Resident Scholar Kara Bruce talking with Eric Brunstad of Dechert LLP (Hartford, Conn.) to preview the bankruptcy cases that the Supreme Court will consider during its 2013 term. Brunstad, who has argued many cases before the Court and is an expert in bankruptcy appellate practice, discusses in depth Law v. Siegel, which questions whether the court may use its general equitable authority under §105 of the Bankruptcy Code to surcharge a debtor's exempt assets, and Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison (In re Bellingham), which will address the bankruptcy court's authority to adjudicate Article III matters. He also provides a candid view of what it is like to argue a case before the Court and an in-depth analysis of the issues involved with the upcoming cases. Here is a short preview: