Daily News: September 29, 2014

ABI Commission to Hold Debates at NCBJ Annual Meeting

ABI’s Commission to Study the Reform of Chapter 11 will hold public debates at the National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges 88th annual meeting in Chicago. The debates will be held October 10, from 3:00 – 4:45 p.m. CT.

The debates will feature top practitioners discussing critical issues pending before the Commission.

ABI’s Commission to Study the Reform of Chapter 11 was formed in 2012 to study and propose reforms to the Bankruptcy Code. The Commission held 17 field hearings from 2012-13 to collect input from parties who work with or are affected by Chapter 11 in their practices. The Commission has been working throughout 2014 to synthesize all of the input into a final report, to be released in December 2014.

The Commission will hold three debates at NCBJ’s 88th annual meeting on important issues in today’s Chapter 11, with advocates arguing their positions before the full Commission.

The first debate will feature Corinne Ball of Jones Day (New York) and Craig Goldblatt of WilmerHale (Washington, D.C.) debating the following questions:

  • If a secured creditor asserts a claim against all of the value generated by a sale of substantially all of the debtor’s assets or plan of reorganization, should the court be able to set aside value from those transactions for the estate Should any such value be made available only to pay administrative claims, or general unsecured creditors as well?
  • John D. Penn of Perkins Coie (Dallas) and Ronald R. Peterson of Jenner & Block (Chicago) will then debate the following questions:

  • Should third-party defendants be able to assert the in pari delicto defense against the trustee in bankruptcy? What about with respect to the debtor in possession or other estate representatives:
  • The debates will conclude with Joseph J. Wielebinski of Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr (Dallas) and Robin E. Phelan of Haynes and Boone (Dallas) considering:

  • Should the interest rate applicable to claims in a § 1129(b) cramdown be determined under the formula adopted by the Supreme Court in Till Are there alternatives that might work just as well or better in a Chapter 11 case?