Tim Springer

As to whether to defend their fee application under 11 U.S.C. § 330, professionals may well be damned if they do and damned if they don't. This article analyzes this statutory conundrum, surveying recent developments and issues for professionals seeking compensation under § 330 of the Bankruptcy Code. Topics discussed include (1) the historical development of the various methods courts use to define "reasonable, actual, and necessary" compensation; (2) awards for the costs incurred while… Show more

As to whether to defend their fee application under 11 U.S.C. § 330, professionals may well be damned if they do and damned if they don't. This article analyzes this statutory conundrum, surveying recent developments and issues for professionals seeking compensation under § 330 of the Bankruptcy Code. Topics discussed include (1) the historical development of the various methods courts use to define "reasonable, actual, and necessary" compensation; (2) awards for the costs incurred while defending a fee application; (3) fee enhancements, including the Fifth Circuits decisions in CRG Partners Grp., L.L.C. v. Neary (In re Pilgrim’s Pride Corp.) and ASARCO L.L.C. v. Jordan Hyden Womble Culbreth & Holzer, P.C. (In re ASARCO L.L.C.); and (4) post-judgment interest accruing during the defense of a fee award. The author argues that the Fifth Circuit has been correct to uphold decades of precedent allowing fee enhancements after the Supreme Court decision in Perdue v. Kenny A. ex rel. Winn, 559 U.S. 542 (2010), and that fees incurred in the defense of fee applications should be recoverable. The article is available for free through SSRN (linked above) or by searching 87 Am. Bankr. L.J. 525 in Westlaw or Lexis. Show less

Discussing four key problem areas where conflicts of interests arise for debtors counsel in bankruptcy cases, including (1) defining the client, (2) Rule 2014 disclosures, (3) payments from different sources, and (4) fee applications.

"Vitro" has become a bankruptcy buzzword for the application of the Bankruptcy Code's public policy exception in cross-border insolvency cases (11 U.S.C. § 1506). This article surveys the developments leading to the Vitro concurso filing, the ping-pong procedural history between the Mexican concurso proceedings and the ancillary proceedings filed in the United States, and how Mexico's treatment of insiders in reorganization plan confirmation creates opportunities for debtors to gain… Show more

"Vitro" has become a bankruptcy buzzword for the application of the Bankruptcy Code's public policy exception in cross-border insolvency cases (11 U.S.C. § 1506). This article surveys the developments leading to the Vitro concurso filing, the ping-pong procedural history between the Mexican concurso proceedings and the ancillary proceedings filed in the United States, and how Mexico's treatment of insiders in reorganization plan confirmation creates opportunities for debtors to gain significant leverage. The article is available for free through SSRN (linked above) or by searching 18 L. & Bus. Rev. Am. 83 in Westlaw or Lexis. Show less

The recent financial unrest in Europe has created significant distressed opportunities. Buyers with free capital have been able to obtain significant quantities of distressed assets at free-fall pricing. In a typical arms-length transaction, these buyers would leave without further concern for the viability of their counter-parties. But these parties may soon find themselves reacquainted with their sweetheart deals if their counter-parties fail to weather liquidity crises and seek bankruptcy… Show more

The recent financial unrest in Europe has created significant distressed opportunities. Buyers with free capital have been able to obtain significant quantities of distressed assets at free-fall pricing. In a typical arms-length transaction, these buyers would leave without further concern for the viability of their counter-parties. But these parties may soon find themselves reacquainted with their sweetheart deals if their counter-parties fail to weather liquidity crises and seek bankruptcy protection. As austerity skirmishes give way to greater financial solidarity, the Eurozone will be both further protected, and yet paradoxically more exposed, to both acute and systemic liquidity risks. This article discusses recent examples from the Eurozone and South America to describe the two and a half hurdles opportunities litigants must overcome to capitalize on favorable U.S. fraudulent transfer laws and unwind distressed foreign deals. The article is available for free through SSRN (linked above) or by searching 38 Brook. J. Int'l L. 1100 in Westlaw or Lexis. Show less

This article discussed ten recent cases in bankruptcy law, including Stern v. Marshall, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011); In re BearingPoint, Inc., 453 B.R. 486 (S.D.N.Y. 2011); 3V Capital Master Fund v. Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of Tousa, Inc. (In re TOUSA, Inc.), 444 B.R. 613 (S.D. Fla. 2011).

The Supreme Court handed down a 5-4 decision on June 23, 2011 in Stern v. Marshall with far reaching consequences concerning bankruptcy courts’ constitutional jurisdiction. Bankruptcy judges and professionals continue to grapple with the consequences of the Stern decision. This article discusses the Stern ruling and its effect on the constitutional authority of Article I courts under 11 U.S.C. §§ 157, 1334.