The Third Circuit made more rules to decide whether an insurance company can be insulated from failure-to-warn claims by the channeling injunction in a chapter 11 ‘asbestos’ plan.
Johnson & Johnson attempted to discredit efforts by lawyers representing personal injury claimants to change their votes on the restructuring plan of J&J's former talc supplier, Imerys Talc America Inc., Reuters reported. Allowing the claimants to change their votes would "make a mockery" of the bankruptcy plan voting process, J&J attorney Ronit Berkovich of Weil, Gotshal & Manges said during Monday's virtual hearing before Bankruptcy Judge Laurie Selber Silverstein. The dispute stems from two law firms that moved to swap their clients’ votes against the Imerys reorganization plan to votes in favor of the plan, which would provide critical support for the proposal. J&J, which has opposed the plan, has urged Silverstein to prevent them from changing the votes or to toss them altogether. Imerys, represented by Latham & Watkins, filed for bankruptcy in February 2019 to deal with about 15,000 lawsuits alleging its products caused ovarian cancer and asbestos-related mesothelioma. The plan, if approved by the bankruptcy court, would set up a trust to compensate personal injury claimants. J&J, which has also faced extensive litigation over its talc products and has denied wrongdoing, argues that Imerys is trying to make it easier for cancer victims to sue J&J instead. The pharmaceutical giant asked the judge to reject motions to change more than 15,000 plan votes submitted by Bevan & Associates, and several hundred more from Williams Hart Boundas Easterby. J&J also filed a separate motion to disqualify those votes altogether. More than 80,000 votes were cast overall. The case is In re Imerys Talc America Inc., U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Delaware, No. 19-10289.
Properly structuring a leveraged refinancing in the Second Circuit can avoid attack as a fraudulent transfer despite the Supreme Court’s effort at narrowing the ‘safe harbor.’
On a question where the courts are split, a New Jersey bankruptcy judge allowed the chapter 13 debtor to retain a $100,000 increase in value when he sold his home.
Although Section 1141(d)(1) sets a default rule only discharging claims that arose before confirmation, Circuit Judge Ambro says that a plan may alter the default rule and allow discharge of administrative claims arising after confirmation.
