Financial distress persists in the commercial real estate market, raising the prospects that property owners and landlords could seek relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Bankruptcy Code contains numerous...more
Three years have passed since the COVID-19 pandemic reached the United States and its effects are still being felt today. Even though lockdown measures have largely disappeared and many workers have returned to the office,...more
The recent decision of the Ninth Circuit in In re Hawkeye Entertainment, LLC contains a few important takeaways with respect to the treatment of executory contracts and unexpired leases under section 365 of the Bankruptcy...more
The intersection between Medicare and state Medicaid regulatory schemes on the one hand and bankruptcy proceedings on the other continues to be an interesting, often highly contested, source of bankruptcy litigation. In...more
To encourage parties to transact with debtors in bankruptcy, the Bankruptcy Code in corporate bankruptcies provides highest priority to “administrative expenses,” which include “the actual, necessary costs and expenses of...more
This entry is part of Nelson Mullins’s ongoing “Bankruptcy Basics” blog series that is intended to address foundational aspects of bankruptcy for non-bankruptcy practitioners and professionals. This entry will discuss how...more
The ability of a bankruptcy trustee or chapter 11 debtor-in-possession ("DIP") to assume, assume and assign, or reject executory contracts and unexpired leases is an important tool designed to promote a "fresh start" for...more
In Highland Capital Mgmt. v. Dondero (In re Highland Capital Mgmt.), Case No. 21-03007-sgj (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2021), the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas held that a debtor could not be compelled to...more
Whether a contract is "executory" such that it can be assumed, rejected, or assigned in bankruptcy is a question infrequently addressed by the circuit courts of appeals. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit...more
On Oct. 28, 2020, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas delivered a key ruling affecting: (1) purchase and sale agreements for produced gas and severed minerals; and (2) agreements with “exclusive...more
On June 22, 2020, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") issued an order concluding that FERC and the U.S. bankruptcy courts have concurrent jurisdiction to review and address the disposition of natural gas...more
During periods of widespread economic disruption such as the present, operating businesses must be able to identify and respond to threats to the financial health of their contracting counterparts in order to protect key...more
Variations in How States Treat Oil & Gas Leases Make Dispositions Complicated - Ability of a debtor to assume, assign, or reject oil and gas “leases” under section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code - Section 365(a) of the...more
The oil price plunge starting on March 6 seems like a sucker-punch to the oil and gas industry after the price decreases and market unrest as a result of COVID-19. However, for those with capital to spend, including...more
In a leading precedent handed down in 2018—Sabine Oil & Gas Corp. v. Nordheim Eagle Ford Gathering, LLC (In re Sabine Oil & Gas Corp.), 734 Fed. Appx. 64 (2d Cir. May 25, 2018)—the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit...more
On December 20, 2019, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas in Alta Mesa Holdings, LP v. Kingfisher Midstream, LLC (In re Alta Mesa Resources, Inc.) held that dedications in gathering agreements create...more
On December 20, 2019, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (Marvin Isgur presiding) entered a memorandum opinion and order finding that midstream gathering agreements created covenants running...more
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Dennis Montali recently ruled in the Chapter 11 case of Pacific Gas & Electric (“PG&E”) that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) has no jurisdiction to interfere with the ability of a...more
In Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC, 139 S. Ct. 652, 2019 WL 2166392 (U.S. May 20, 2019), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the rejection in bankruptcy of a trademark license agreement, which constitutes a...more
In a much-awaited and pivotal decision in the PG&E chapter 11 proceeding, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California held that it not only has exclusive jurisdiction over the rejection of wholesale...more
What happens if you are a trademark licensee and your licensor files for bankruptcy protection? Can the licensor unilaterally terminate your license and prohibit you from using the license – even if you're in the middle of...more
The United States Supreme Court has rendered a decision that represents a victory for licensees of trademarks throughout the country when faced with a bankrupt licensor....more
Our May 22 post reported on the Supreme Court’s May 20 decision in Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC,[1] an 8-1 decision holding that the rejection of a trademark license in which the debtor is the licensor...more
In an 8–1 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and held that rejection of a trademark license in bankruptcy constitutes a breach of the license agreement,...more
This past May, in a highly-anticipated decision, the Supreme Court held in Mission Product Holdings, Inc. v. Tempnology, LLC that a debtor’s rejection of an executory contract under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code has the...more