Doing a great forensic fraud analysis is meaningless unless the findings are reported effectively. Learn from the pros how to do it right the first time.
Other content in this Stream
JTF Rose, Inc. v. Esquerra
BAP for 9th Cir. vacated and remanded bankruptcy court (CD Cal.) order denying creditor's motion to dismiss chapter 13 case.
Clientron Corp. v. Devon IT, Inc.
The Court of Appeals vacated the District Court's sanction order, and remanded to impose a new sanction.
A Big Stretch for Bankruptcy Jurisdiction: SPV OSUS v. UBS
"[SPV OSUS Ltd. v. UBS AG] is notable for its expression of the Second Circuit’s rather extraordinary view of “related to” bankruptcy jurisdiction."
Ninth and Fourth Circuits Issue Important Rulings on Sanctions and Exemptions
Ninth Circuit opinion is prime for Supreme Court review regarding the extent of a bankruptcy court’s contempt powers.
Reverse Fraudulent Transfer Claim: Venezuela and Disputes Over Gold
Venezuela insisted that the Crystallex judgment would never be paid so it engineered a “reverse fraudulent transfer” to take assets out of the U.S. and back to Venezuela to avoid creditor claims.
Supreme Court Clarifies Power to Claw Back Transfers Made Through Financial Institutions
A Feb. 27, 2018, decision by the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a split in the circuit courts by clarifying that a bankruptcy trustee[...] may claw back preferences and constructive fraudulent transfers.
Tribune Creditors Seek Reconsideration on Implied Preemption by the ‘Safe Harbor’
Following a suggestion made by two Supreme Court justices, Tribune creditors ask the Second Circuit to recall the mandate and remand for reconsideration in district court.
Supreme Court’s Second ‘Safe Harbor’ Case Is in Limbo
Two justices recommend that the Second Circuit reconsider the ‘Tribune’ safe harbor decision in light of Merit Management.
A Different Sort of Tax Refund: The Ninth Circuit Allows Debtors in Possession to Recover Tax Payments to the IRS Under § 544(b)
In re DBSI Inc., offers new precedent that swings the balance back toward debtors and general unsecured creditors at the expense of the IRS.
24:43Current State of Consumer Bankruptcy Law, Most Litigated Consumer Issues
ABI Deputy Executive Director Amy Quackenboss talks with David Cox of Cox Law Group and Elizabeth Gunn of the Office of the Virginia Attorney General about their new consumer book.
21:15Approaches to Fraudulent-Transfer Litigation Involving Bitcoins
As wild fluctuations in cryptocurrency value invites a potential surge in bitcoin-related bankruptcies, we examines how to approach cryptocurrency in fraudulent-transfer fraudulent-transfer litigation
Medical Lien Mgmt, Inc. v. Dampier
The debtor's debt for criminal restitution is not dischargeable under § 523(a)(7) where he had failed to preserve the argument that his former employers were not governmental units.
Circuit Split: Is a Deposit into a Debtor’s Bank Account a “Transfer” Under § 101(54)?
[...]Is a deposit or wire transfer into a debtor’s bank account a “transfer” within the meaning of § 101(54)? The legislative history behind § 101(54) suggests that the answer is “Yes.”
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in a Third Bankruptcy Case This Term
High court to decide whether a false oral statement about one asset results in nondischargeability.
In re Haler
Oral statement that company was in "very fine legally [sic] financial shape" & had "plenty of cash to operate" is within exception under 523(a)(2)(A) so the debt was dischargeable. Judgement reversed.
Kramer v. Mahia
The 2d Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s judgment, finding that five of the appellant’s arguments were meritless for the same reasons stated in the district court's order.
Millennium: At the Intersection of Stern v. Marshall and Third-Party Releases
The issue of nonconsensual third-party releases in chapter 11 plans continues to generate litigation.
Evans v. Otimo: Revisiting Issue Preclusion in the Second Circuit
Creditors contemplating discharge proceeding pursuant to § 523(a)(2)(A)’s fraud provision should be mindful of several potential pitfalls before assuming prior state judgment applies.
Supreme Court Primed to Hold Safe Harbor Inapplicable if Bank Is a ‘Mere Conduit’