BANKRUPTCY CASE LAW:
CHAPTER 11 GENERAL ISSUES
The following
is for the exclusive use of attorneys.
This firm does not make any representations as to the accuracy or current status of any case cited herein.
![]()
In re: Midpoint Dev., L.L.C. (10/31/06 - No. 05-6046) (10th Cir. Ct. Apps) Dismissal of a debtor's Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition is affirmed where the district court correctly concluded that the debtor had ceased to legally exist prior to its bankruptcy filing, and that thus, its bankruptcy filing was a nullity and subject to dismissal. http://laws.lp.findlaw.com/10th/056046.html
IN RE: DEBBIE REYNOLDS HOTEL & CASINO, INC. (07/06/01 - No. 99-17240) (9th Cir. Ct App) Bankruptcy Code Section 506(c), which limits standing to challenge a settlement agreement to the trustee or Chapter 11 debtors-in-possession, applies retroactively. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/9917240p.pdf
IN RE: CIRCLE K CORP. (12/05/01 - No. 00-15361) (9th Cir. Ct App) A professional's application for services in a Chapter 11 proceeding must unambiguously seek pre-approval under 11 USC 328 or it will be subject to reasonableness review under 11 USC 330, although a bankruptcy court's failure to specify will not preclude review under section 328. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0015361p.pdf
ATALANTA CORP. v. ALLEN (08/16/02 - No. 01-15301/04) Bankruptcy court did not err in confirming a reorganization plan that did not incorporate either the terms of a stipulation between the parties, or the court's order approving it, where neither document indicated it would be binding in a subsequent reorganization plan. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0115301p.pdf
TEMECULA v. LPM CORP., No. 01-56570 (9th Cir. August 22, 2002) Chapter 11 rent claims, having administrative priority under 11 U.S.C. section 365(d)(3), do not have super-priority over other administrative claims when a bankruptcy is converted to Chapter 7. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/9th/0156570p.pdf
![]()
CRAM DOWNS IN CHAPTER 11: 1129 AND 1111(b)(2)
Imagine that the debt is $200,000 and that it is secured by a first lien on real property worth $150,000. If the undersecured creditor does not make the section 1111(b)(2) election, you can strip the lien down to the $150,000 value of the real property and pay that $150,000 off with interest over whatever period of time the court will allow (probably at least fifteen years, I'd think, but it may depend on the condition of the collateral and on the expected financial stability of the reorganized debtor). Assuming you use 1129(b)(2)(A)(i), the plan will have to let the creditor retain its lien on the property for the amount of the allowed secured claim ($150,000), will have to provide for cash payments over time that have a present value as of the effective date of the plan equal to the value of the lien ($150,000) (which means you will have to provide for payment of the $150,000 with interest over a period of time), and will have to provide for cash payments (including both principal and interest) that total at least $150,000 (which will obviously be satisfied because there is no way, if you don't have a time machine, to make payments with a present value of $150,000 without paying at least 150,000 total dollars of principal and interest).
The language of (b)(2)(A)(i) is complex due to the possibility that the undersecured creditor will make the section 1111(b)(2) election.
If the unsecured creditor makes the section 1111(b)(2) election then you have to let the creditor keep a lien for the entire amount of its $200,000 debt (because the whole $200,000 will be treated as an allowed secured claim), and you have to provide for the total of all the payments to be at least $200,000 (because the allowed secured claim will be $200,000), but the present value of the payments need not be more than $150,000 (because that continues to be the value of the lien -- a lien cannot be worth more than the value of the collateral, and thus the making of the section 1111(b)(2) election does not increase the value of the lien). Interest payments made under the modified mortgage are permitted to count toward the $200,000 in total cash payments. Thus, as long as the court will let you make payments over a long enough time period, you can meet the $200,000 total payment requirement without having to pay more than $150,000 in present value. That means the making of the election usually does not require you to provide larger payments in the plan. But if the reorganized debtor then wants to refinance or to sell the property free and clear in the next several years, the secured creditor can block the sale or refinancing unless it is paid the remaining amount that is not yet paid of the $200,000. That gives the secured creditor leverage to extract a payment in exchange for releasing its lien
![]()
OPINION SUMMARIES ARCHIVE FindLaw archives case law summaries of opinion issued since September 2000 by the U.S. Supreme Court, all thirteen Federal Circuit Courts, the California Supreme Court, the California Appellate Courts, and the New York Court of Appeals. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casesummary/index.html