Maine State Approved Sessions

Do directors’ duties or decision processes change when the company’s conditions worsen? Is there still any implication to a “zone of insolvency”? How do directors’ duties change in bankruptcy? What duties are there to secured and unsecured creditors? Are there duties to controlled affiliates or their constituencies? Are there process protections? Quadrant (Delaware decision on board action).

Major cases filed in New York may follow that state’s laws because of the location of the forum, contractual designation or some other reason. But New York law on debtors/creditors, fraudulent transfer, partnership and other areas may be out of date or may depart from the laws of other jurisdictions. Discussion of New York State law issues and recent cases certified to the New York State Court of Appeals, including rent-controlled leaseholds as property rights.

Discussion of EPF bankruptcy process issues. What are the duties of directors and their professionals in complex multi-debtor cases? More generally, when is it necessary to obtain a conflict waiver? Current vs. recent vs. former clients; directly adverse vs. positionally adverse; relatedness to a prior matter; use of confidential information; review of disinterestedness standards under Bankruptcy Code § 101(14) and related disclosure requirements; ABI Report on Standards of Professional Courtesy and Conduct.

This panel will discuss the first-day orders necessary to keep a casino open (including regulatory interplay), including motions related to chips, loyalty programs and progressive play. Featured will be a discussion of the issues related to valuation and the extent of security interests, including cash as proceeds of gaming collateral and perfection of bankroll, along with issues related to plan confirmation and § 363 sales,‎ including regulatory limitations and protection of customer lists.

This panel will discuss the ways that companies and their advisers can address issues relating to governmental agency investigations (SEC, FBI, IRS) of the debtor and its management, including nondebtor stays, exceptions to discharge and other issues.

This panel will address a variety of issues in chapter 11 cases, including cramdown interest rates, credit-bidding and equitable mootness, among other issues.

This year’s hot topics will include two cases currently pending before the U.S. Supreme Court: the Caulkett decision concerning lien-stripping on primary residences in chapter 7 cases, and the Harris case regarding distribution of funds held by a chapter 13 trustee upon conversion to chapter 7. The panel will discuss a new Ninth Circuit BAP decision, one of only two in the country, concerning the dischargeability of certain student debts to for-profit institutions, as well as an emerging trend of using the Eleventh Circuit Crawford decision and the FDCPA to challenge “stale” proofs of claim for student debt. The presentation will address lenders refusing to retake abandoned collateral, as well as conflicting results from disposable-income tests, and other issues that will be of interest to those representing parties in consumer cases.

While case flings are down, the disputes that rage on in the cases have continued on. The panel will address three (3) selected litigation issues impacting the process: (a) Discovery Matters In Bankruptcy Cases – “Get to the point, get there quickly, get there cost effectively, and get the facts and documents organized”; (b) Expert Witness Matters – “If they know more than you, they must be an expert – right?” Bankruptcy Judges are becoming more discriminating (and more selective) in who and what is a proper expert and the purview of expert testimony. The panel will discuss and explore the Daubert criteria for experts, and discuss practical and strategic issues related to the effective use of expert testimony in bankruptcy litigation; and (c) Examiner Reports In Bankruptcy Litigation – we paid a lot of money and used up a lot of time on this report – now what? The legal and strategic issues related to examiner reports in bankruptcy cases.

Nortel (two courts simultaneously trying allocation issues); Suntech, Barnet and subsequent bankruptcy court decisions on remand (recognition and § 109(a)); Fairfield Sentry Limited (sale of SIPA claims); enforcement of judgments (Argentina litigation, Madoff); filing of chapter 11 cases by foreign debtors (Alsacia); extraterritoriality issues regarding avoidance actions (Madoff decisions). Do Fairfield, Quimonda, and Madoff represent a retreat from the principle of comity set forth in chapter 15?

John W. Lucas, Moderator Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP; San Francisco Judicial Debate Resolved: The “disinterestedness” requirement should be strictly enforced under § 327 (no waivers or ethical walls). Pro: Hon. Randall L. Dunn U.S. Bankruptcy Court (D. Or.); Portland Con: Hon. Madeleine C. Wanslee U.S. Bankruptcy Court (D. Ariz.); Phoenix Business Debate Resolved: Acceleration of a debt obligation under a credit agreement should act to prevent the lender from enforcing a prepayment premium Pro: Lori Sinanyan Jones Day; Los Angeles Con: Michael H. Strub, Jr. Irell & Manella LLP; Newport Beach, Calif. Consumer Debate Resolved: Attorneys should be permitted to unbundle services under an engagement agreement with a consumer debtor. Pro: Samuel A. Schwartz The Schwartz Law Firm, Inc.; Las Vegas Con: John R. Bollinger Boleman Law Firm, P.C.; Hampton, Va.