Bankruptcy Litigation Committee

On Feb. 1, 2022, Hon. David S. Jones of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York denied a motion to dismiss the chapter 11 cases of JPA No. 111 Co. Ltd. and JPA No. 49 Co. Ltd.

One of the many ways the COVID-19 pandemic has upended litigation is by making in-person depositions, for the time being, practically impossible. But cases must still go forward, so courts and parties have increasingly turned to remote deposition technology to keep litigation moving.

As state and local governments begin to reinstate or expand restrictions on the operation of retail establishments and restaurants to curb the spread of the novel coronavirus, operators of such establishments and their lessors must again focus on who must shoulder the economic impact of that burden.

Trustees and their counsel can breathe easier in the Fifth Circuit.

Before litigating an adversary proceeding or contested matter against a state or its agencies, plaintiffs would be wise to consider whether the state entity has a colorable sovereign immunity defense.[1] In In re La Paloma Generating Co.,[2] Delaware Chief Bankruptcy Judge Ch

In enacting § 106(a) of the Bankruptcy Code,[1] Congress waived the government’s ability to assert the defense of sovereign immunity with respect to a variety of Bankruptcy Code provisions.[2] Section 106(a) specifically authorizes the court to “issue against a governmental unit

A Delaware Bankruptcy Court has held that litigants pursuing post-confirmation state law fraud claims against the trustees of a mass-tort litigation trust must first seek leave from the bankruptcy court that established the trust. In Smith v.

On April 9, 2018, Hon. Martin Glenn of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York approved third-party releases of nondebtor affiliate guarantors in a chapter 15 proceeding, even though not all of the parties bound by the releases had voted in favor of the releases.[1]

In the Second Circuit, § 109(a) of the Bankruptcy Code applies to cases brought under chapter 15, meaning that a foreign representative cannot seek recognition or any other type of relief under chapter 15 if the foreign debtor does not have a domicile, residence, place of business or property in the U.S.[1]

Recently, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York was asked to decide whether an auditor was required to provide its work papers to a foreign representative who sought to compel such production pursuant to certain provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and the Bankruptcy Rules, including Bankruptcy Code § 1521.