2022 Bankruptcy 2022: Views from the Bench

ABI’s Bankruptcy 2022: Views from the Bench program is a unique opportunity for bankruptcy practitioners to hear from more than 24 sitting and retired bankruptcy judges during a full day of high-quality CLE and networking opportunities. This year’s program will include a two-part session on confirmation issues and will cover such timely topics as makewhole provisions, bankruptcy appeals, divisive mergers and bad-faith arguments. Great Debates, a special conversation on the Supreme Court, and ethics sessions will round out the day’s programming.

This session will cover a number of confirmation hot topics, including the allowance of unmatured interest (Hertz), makewhole provisions, private sponsor liability risk (In re ASHINC Corp.) and D&Os (Toys “R” Us litigation).

This session will dive into mass tort cases, “Texas Two-Step” divisive mergers and the bad-faith arguments surrounding them, and equitable mootness (Talarico v. Ultra Petro. Corp. and others).

This panel will discuss UST authority in appointing committees, venue impact on committee appointment and committee composition, when it makes sense to have two committees and when it does not, and the retention of professionals or substantive contributions. The panelists also will discuss the scope of Rule 2004 examinations post-confirmation.

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.

This session will focus on several of the Model Rules of Professional Conduct, including 1.2 (Scope of Representation and Allocation of Authority Between Client and Lawyer), 1.4 (Communications), 1.6 (Confidentiality of Info.), 1.7 (Conflict of Interest: Current Clients), 1.18 (Duties to Prospective Clients), 3.3 (Candor to Tribunal), 3.4 (Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel) and 7.3 (Solicitation of Clients). The panelists will also discuss many current ethical challenges, including ethical issues in subchapter V, future claimants' representative (FCR) standards, remote proceedings and witness testimony, and client authority.