Administrative Expense Claims

The Second Circuit essentially reissued its original decision from last year by again requiring the U.S. Trustee to refund the overpayment of unconstitutional fees.

Court :

2nd Circuit

Need for Bankruptcy Code Reform for Individual Chapter 11 Cases

Bankruptcy Code

Topic Tags

Administrative Expense Claims

BAPCPA at 10

Bankruptcy Litigation

Practice and Procedure

Professional Compensation/Fees

Business Reorganization

Second Circuit Says Orderly Liquidation Value Is Proper for a Retailer in Chapter 11

The Second Circuit adapts Rash to value the lender’s collateral in chapter 11 where there was a going-concern sale.

Court :

2nd Circuit

Otherwise Valid Post-Petition Claims Sometimes Won’t Qualify for Administrative Status

Judge Sarah Hall declined to expand the exception in Reading for post-petition claims to have administrative status.

Court :

10th Circuit

Oklahoma

Oklahoma Western District

An Overview of a § 363 Sale Involving a Stalking-Horse Bidder

Jan 2023

Bankruptcy Code

11 U.S.C. § 363

Topic Tags

Administrative Expense Claims

Asset Sales

Practice and Procedure

Business Reorganization

Although It Paid Creditors in Full, Eleventh Circuit Subordinates an Unauthorized Loan

Eleventh Circuit gives the bankruptcy judge wide discretion in subordinating debts and denying retroactive approval of loans.

Court :

11th Circuit

Circuit Ruling Expands Subsequent New-Value Preference Defense

Dec 2022

Bankruptcy Code

503

547

Topic Tags

Administrative Expense Claims

Claims

Bankruptcy Litigation

Preferences

Business Reorganization

First-day Motions

Unsecured Trade Creditors

Eleventh Circuit Upholds “New Value” Defense to Preference Claim Without Reduction for Payment of Creditor’s § 503(b)(9) Claim

A recent decision by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals addresses an issue previously addressed by only one other circuit court and should be welcome news for preference defendants asserting a “subsequent new value” defense while also having a § 503(b)(9) claim. In the case of Auriga Polymers Inc. v.

Subscribe to %1