Case law

LightSquared LP v. SP Special Opportunities LLC (In re LightSquared Inc.)

511 B.R. 253 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jun 10, 2014

In fact, the evidence has established that Mr. Ergen wholly owns SPSO. … But you go play in the mud and the dirt and you probably aren’t going to get disease either because you get immune to it.

Centric Brands Inc.

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 25, 2022

As the Claims Release clearly releases the exact claims that Ms. Allen now seeks to assert for wrongful termination, retaliation, and discrimination, this factor strongly weighs in favor of the Debtor. … “These benefits qualify as the sort of consideration that . . . militate in favor of the Agreement’s validity.” Id. (citing Kramer v. Vendome Grp. LLC, 2012 WL 4841310, at *5 (S.D.N.Y.

Wasserstein, as Trustee of the WB Bridge Creditor v. 11 Apple LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 5, 2024

While LTRB contends that the Trustee does not qualify as LTRB’s former client, the Trustee and the UST disagree. See Disqualification Opp. ¶ 20; but see Disqualification Motion ¶ 22; UST Letter at 3. … Supp. 1057, 1060 (S.D.N.Y. 1976), aff'd, 569 F.2d 737 (2d Cir. 1978) (“Furthermore, if a substantial relationship is established, the presumption of access to confidences prevails even though the ‘confidential’ information

WB Bridge Hotel LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 5, 2024

While LTRB contends that the Trustee does not qualify as LTRB’s former client, the Trustee and the UST disagree. See Disqualification Opp. ¶ 20; but see Disqualification Motion ¶ 22; UST Letter at 3. … Supp. 1057, 1060 (S.D.N.Y. 1976), aff'd, 569 F.2d 737 (2d Cir. 1978) (“Furthermore, if a substantial relationship is established, the presumption of access to confidences prevails even though the ‘confidential’ information

Old Carco LLC, (f/k/a Chrysler LLC)

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jan 27, 2022

They further assert that FCA aims to broaden the effect of the Sale Order to immunize FCA from the consequences of its post-Closing conduct. (Id.) … Proceedings “arising under” the Bankruptcy Code are those “that clearly invoke substantive rights created by federal bankruptcy law.” MBNA Am. Bank, N.A., 436 F.3d at 108–09.

Times Square JV LLC v. 1601 Enterprises Inc

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 11, 2024

New York law clearly provides that—even if Plaintiff did not comply with its own Lease obligations—1601 Enterprises would “still be obligated to . . . pay [] because there was no express provision in the lease relieving … notwithstanding the payment obligations imposed by the Lease, 1601 Enterprises has not paid Fixed Rent or Operating Expenses for all of the First Rental Period and much of the Second Rental Period, which qualifies

Findley v. Blinken (In Re Joint Eastern & Southern Districts Asbestos Litigation)

120 B.R. 648 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Nov 30, 1990

It emerges clearly from the foregoing efforts that the two questions referred by the Court call without a doubt for affirmative answers. … For non-malignant disease to qualify for consideration as part of Level I, it must involve a claimant who (a) has died where asbestos disease was a substantial contributing factor to the death or (b) is unable to work, suffers

Pereira v. Urthbox Inc.

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Aug 28, 2023

The Second Circuit has not stated how much time must elapse before a delay in prosecuting an action qualifies as “significant.” See Rubin v. Abbott Lab’ys, 319 F.R.D. 118, 119 (S.D.N.Y. 2016). … Clearly, the case at bar is not such a classic setoff situation. As an alternative basis, there is conflicting case law regarding the merits of the recoupment argument. See Pereira v. Equitable Life Ins.

Xiao v. United States Department of Education/Nelnet

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Aug 30, 2025

Plaintiff qualifies for income-based repayment plans with the DOE. … According to Plaintiff, his expense categories were “clearly delineated,” “scrutinized during Deposition,” and “certainly agreed to without any confusion in the Joint Statement,” and that DOE’s challenge to them constitute

Ditech Holding Corporation

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Oct 26, 2022

They contend that the only issue asserted in the Walters Claim Objection is that the Consumer Creditors’ claims do not qualify as claims under section 363(o) of the Bankruptcy Code. Id. ¶ 2. … Response ¶ 25 (“Ditech also serviced the loans, collected, and foreclosed on the same people which it had fraudulently qualified.”).

LATAM Airlines Group S.A., et al.

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 26, 2022

Insolvency is a question of fact and the findings of the Bankruptcy Court in this regard will not be disturbed unless they are clearly erroneous. See In re CIL Ltd., 582 B.R. 46, 104 (Bankr. … Even if these “questions of law” raised by the TLA Claimholders qualified as such, they have offered minimal support that the Confirmation Opinion conflicts with other case law on these issues.

In re Sabine Oil & Gas Corp.

555 B.R. 180 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Aug 18, 2016

Although the Committee repeatedly has argued that the Debtors underestimate the amounts that could be recovered from litigating the Bucket II Claims, it is unclear why the Committee failed to ask a highly qualified expert … Indeed, the case law cited by the Committee does not clearly stand for the proposition that a court’s consideration, to any extent, of data other than the “most recent” is improper.

In Re Chemtura Corp.

448 B.R. 635 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Apr 19, 2011

of this argument was precluded by the law of the case, 111 which would normally preclude reconsideration of the legal premise unless certain exceptions were applicable, one of which would be an earlier decision that was clearly … erroneous. 112 And the Minidoka II court found that the Minidoka I court’s earlier ruling as to this issue didn’t qualify under that exception. 113 It stated, in analysis highly relevant here: *665 “We therefore conclude

ALAN NISSELSON, as Trustee of the Estate of Port M v. MARJERRY REALTY CORP.

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Oct 6, 2022

The Trustee clearly does not have standing to vindicate the rights of those other employees. … But the plaintiffs' right to enforce duties owed to them is not qualified by the fact that they may also have claims against the [debtor’s] estate.”)

Ditech Holding Corporation

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Aug 2, 2023

Nor does he clearly indicate that Green Tree intended for him to rely on the alleged false statement of material fact. … Because Claimant did not reaffirm the loan, the servicer continued to qualify for an exemption from the periodic statement rule. 12 C.F.R. § 1026.41(e)(5)(ii).

Ditech Holding Corporation

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 29, 2023

“To qualify as ‘strong,’ ‘the inference of scienter must be more than merely “reasonable” or “permissible”—it must be cogent and compelling, thus strong in light of the other explanations.’” O’Connell v. … Insurance Dispute In addition to the six specific and clearly identifiable causes of action, the Claimant makes several other complaints about the servicing of

In re NII Holdings, Inc.

536 B.R. 61 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Aug 26, 2015

As set forth in detail below, the settlement embodied in the Plan is clearly in the best *66 interests of the estates. The Plan is confirmed. … June 9, 2015 Hr'g Tr. 42:11-16 (Frei-man) ("Well, clearly from some of the points of view that [Mr.

Genever Holdings LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Nov 3, 2022

Although well qualified, the BVI Court is not best suited to address the gating issues in these cases. … That is clearly the case here. Genever (US)’s primary asset is the Sherry-Netherland Apartment, which is located in New York, and New York and Connecticut share a border.

PT Bakrie Telecom Tbk

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Apr 15, 2021

Indeed, bankruptcy courts have rejected similar arguments, concluding that the foreign main proceeding continued to qualify as a foreign proceeding despite being “closed” under Section 101(23) of the Bankruptcy Code when … The foreign court here does not have the same well-established reputation. See Fox v. Bank Mandiri (In re Perry H. Koplik & Sons, Inc.), 357 B.R. 231, 239–44 (Bankr.

Hurwitz v. Fung Holdings 1937 Limited

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Dec 16, 2024

In other words, to qualify for protection under the securities safe harbor, § 546(e) provides that the otherwise avoidable transfer itself be a transfer that meets the safe-harbor criteria. … The decision in Merit Management quite clearly commands that in deciding whether section 546(e) applies I should look at the transfer that the plaintiff seeks to avoid and whether that transfer “itself” was a payment to