Author Archives: Stephen Johnson

Fifth Circuit Holds that Fixed Quantities are Not Required to Satisfy the “Forward Contracts” Safe Harbor Defense

Posted on September 25, 2012 by Stephen Johnson and Thomas Curtin

On August 2, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that a requirements contract for the supply of electricity constituted a “forward contract” under the Bankruptcy Code and, therefore, was exempt from preference avoidance actions. The Fifth Circuit held that the contract in this case met the plain language definition of a “forward contract,” notwithstanding the fact that it lacked fixed quantity and delivery date terms. Lightfoot v. MXEnergy Elec., Inc. (In re MBS Mgmt. Servs., Inc.), 2012 WL 3125167 (5th Cir. Aug. 2, 2012). Continue reading →

Posted in Avoidance Actions/Fraudulent Transfers

In re Ashapura: Southern District of New York Holds that Proceeding Under Repealed Foreign Law is Entitled to Chapter 15 Recognition

Posted on September 4, 2012 by Stephen Johnson and Michael A. Stevens

On June 28, 2012, Judge Shira A. Scheindlin of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York affirmed the order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York granting Ahapura Minechem Ltd.’s petition for recognition of its Indian insolvency proceeding as a foreign main proceeding under chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code. Armada v. Shah (In re Ashapura Minechem Ltd.), 2012 WL 2478467 (S.D.N.Y. June 28, 2012). In so holding, the District Court approved the recognition of a proceeding governed by a statute, The Sick Industrial Companies Act (“SICA”), that Indian legal scholars have sharply criticized and that the Indian legislature actually repealed in 2003. Continue reading →

Posted in Chapter 15

Seventh Circuit Holds Companies Liable for Insolvent Affiliate’s Pension Obligations

Posted on January 27, 2012 by Stephen Johnson and Patrick Evans

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed a district court decision holding that two limited liability companies were jointly and severally liable for the pension obligations of a third, insolvent affiliate that had ceased making contributions to a multiemployer pension fund. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. SCOFBP, No. 10-3633 (7th Cir. Dec. 27, 2011). Continue reading →

Posted in News Tagged , |