As a result of the breadth of our experience, we are highly effective in minimizing exposure for our clients that are defendants and maximizing recoveries when we prosecute preference or other avoidance actions.Meyer Suozzi’s bankruptcy attorneys have extensive experience in representing landlords of large office buildings and other commercial properties in New York City, Long Island and elsewhere in chapter 11 and 7 cases.(a) to recover leased premises from debtors and trustees; (b) concerning a chapter 11 debtor‘s or trustee’s attempt to assume or assume and assign real property leases; and (c) regarding claims for pre and postpetition rent.With that in mind, the Weil Bankruptcy Blog is introducing a new periodic series: the Background: A former business partner of a chapter 7 debtor objected to discharge of his claim against the debtor under section 523(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code because the debtor allegedly had committed fraud while acting in a fiduciary for a bankruptcy judge to determine allowance of a claim after finding it non-dischargeable and enter judgment in favor of the creditor on account of such claims, the bankruptcy court questioned whether it had authority to follow this practice post-.Accordingly, it declined to enter a dollar judgment in favor of the creditor and limited its holding to a determination of the amount of debt found nondischargeable.Meyer Suozzi’s bankruptcy attorneys have represented scores of creditors’ committee chairs and committee members in chapter 11 cases in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and in the District of Delaware.We help our clients maneuver through the committee member selection process, counsel clients on their fiduciary duties while serving on the committee, participate in committee meetings or on committee calls together with or in place of clients, and help negotiate the debtor’s restructuring and emergence from chapter 11 on terms most favorable to the creditors.“I loved that Duke Law was so collaborative,” he says.
The bankruptcy court entered final judgment in favor of the debtor on its counterclaims, which were premised on breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment. [or] with consent, a bankruptcy judge [can enter] a judgment.”The court stated that in the instant case the status of consent was uncertain because the parties had not been clear in their pleadings. [by] a bankruptcy judge.” Although the trustee consented, the creditor did not.
, in the Weil Bankruptcy Blog’s sweet sixteen, the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy courts is foremost on the minds of many practitioners.
So it should come as no surprise that the bankruptcy bar is abuzz following the Supreme Court’s recent decision in 564 U. 2 (2011), holding that bankruptcy courts lack the constitutional authority to enter final judgment on a state law counterclaim that is not resolved in the process of ruling on a creditor’s proof of claim. The answer to that question will be determined largely by how the lower courts interpret the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Meyer Suozzi’s bankruptcy attorneys regularly represent banks, mortgage lenders, insurance companies, mutual funds, indenture trustees, finance companies, factors and equipment lessors in all aspects of out-of-court workouts, restructurings, reorganizations, liquidations and chapter 7, chapter 11 and chapter 15 bankruptcies.
Our extensive experience includes debtor-in-possession and exit financing and all bankruptcy-related litigation (including collection and lender liability litigation).