Indiana State Approved Sessions

This panel will review contemporary decisions interpreting Dewsnup v. Timm and Nobelman v. American Savings Bank, such as the Wachovia Mortg. v. Smoot, 478 B.R. 555 (E.D.N.Y. 2012), which precludes lien-stripping. The discussion will also focus on §§ 1123(b)(5) and 1322(b)(2), including conflicting decisions involving the date that is relevant for deciding whether a particular property functions as the debtor’s principal residence (see In re Proctor, 494 B.R. 833 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. 2013)). The panel might also discuss lien-stripping as it involves properties outside the principal residence’s safe harbor.

This panel will discuss § 1398 short-year elections, separate-entity rules, discharge of taxes, cancellation of debt income, and tax issues arising from mortgage foreclosures, modifications and abandonment.

This panel will explain the practice of “unbundling,” along with the ethical and legal considerations involved, and will provide sample engagement letters where services are unbundled. The panel will discuss evolving case law on this issue wherein debtors and their attorneys attempt to use alternative agreements to limit the scope of their representation. ABI's Ethics Task Force Final Report might also be applied.

This panel will consider the myriad issues involving exemptions and property of the estate, including timing issues involving exemptions (In re Hageman, 388 B.R. 896 (Bankr. C.D. Ill. 2008)), dollar-value exemptions (In re Gebhart, 621 F.3d 1206 (9th Cir. 2010)), limitations on the extraterritorial effect of exemptions (In re Long, 470 B.R. 186 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2012)), non-spousal inherited IRAs (In re Clark, 714 F.3d 559 (7th Cir. 2013)), tax refunds, limited liability company membership interests and § 522(b)(3).

This panel will discuss applicable federal and state laws, case studies, transactions in regards to actual vs. constructive fraud, tests for constructive fraudulent transfers, and professional liability.

This panel will examine a multitude of issues involved in financing a chapter 11 exit, including the complications caused by a § 1111(b) election and plan treatment options. Feasibility issues, including balloon provisions and deed-in-lieu clauses, will also be discussed, as well as issues that arise when determining whether a plan is fair and equitable, including deferred payment clauses, interest rates, negative amortization, partial surrender of collateral, carve-outs and differing treatment of trade claims. Dirt-for-debt proposals might also be discussed, along with issues involving indubitable equivalence.

This panel will discuss the complexities of recovering assets in China, Mexico and Canada, including attachment, perfection and priority issues that are unique in each jurisdiction, and the interplay of foreign registration systems and the Uniform Commercial Code. The panel discussion might include some of the complications involved in owning or being secured by foreign assets, including foreign exchange and other currency restrictions.

This panel will discuss common issues that arise in a § 363 sale, including timing issues, typical marketing programs (or conversely, no-shop clauses), bid procedures, break-up fees and bid-protection provisions. The panel might also touch on critical-vendor provisions, employee incentive programs, claw-back and true-up provisions, and successor liability clauses, as well as the applicability of the various subsections in § 363(f).

Texts, IMs, emails and metadata might contain information that could be helpful — or could be harmful to your client’s claims. You might want to obtain that information from your adversary, but you will undoubtedly also want to see your own client’s information before your adversary does. Where do you look? This expert panel will discuss and debate the myriad electronic discovery issues that exist and the challenges facing parties in bankruptcy cases, including asserting and avoiding claims of spoliation. It is a discussion you will want to be a part of — before your client hits “DELETE.”

Parties can view social media as a treasure-trove of information: Does a debtor discuss assets on Facebook that are not found on the schedules? Do parties make statements in their online posts that conflict with legal positions they are taking in bankruptcy court? Does the ethical duty of a reasonable investigation encompass an obligation to investigate a client’s social media activity? This panel of experts will review the ethical obligations of investigating social media websites of clients and parties, and what may — and in some cases, must — be done to remain zealous advocates.