Customer Support: 800-526-4902
 
Home > Legal Library > Article




Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected


Secured Creditors' Right to "Bid In" Claims in Chapter 11 Sales Challenged




by:
Paul J. Catanese
McGuireWoods LLP - Chicago Office

Douglas M. Foley
McGuireWoods LLP - Norfolk Office

Richard J. Mason
McGuireWoods LLP - Chicago Office

 
March 10, 2010

Previously published on February 26, 2010

Decisions in two recent bankruptcy cases have challenged a common belief that partially secured creditors have an absolute right to protect their collateral by credit bidding their entire claim in sales held pursuant to chapter 11 plans.

In a recent decision of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, In re Pacific Lumber Co., 584 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2009), written by the conservative Judge Edith Jones, the court found that the Bankruptcy Code did not always give a secured creditor the right to credit bid at a sale of its collateral as part of a chapter 11 plan.

Similarly, a recent decision of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in In re Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC, 418 B.R. 548 (E.D. Pa. 2009) reversed a decision of the Bankruptcy Court and found that the Bankruptcy Court could approve certain bid procedures that specifically prohibited a secured party from credit bidding at a sale pursuant to a chapter 11 plan.

The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals granted an appeal of the District Court’s decision, and stayed the debtors’ proposed auction and sale pending the appeal. The 3rd Circuit has thus set the stage for an important decision governing secured creditors’ rights to protect their collateral in the District of Delaware, a frequent venue for complex chapter 11 cases.

5th Circuit Reasoning

In In re Pacific Lumber Co., the 5th Circuit, in a direct appeal of an order rejecting the secured lenders’ objection to the plan, stated that "paying off secured creditors in cash can hardly be improper if the plan accurately reflected the value of the [the secured lenders’] collateral.”

Moreover, the 5th Circuit concluded that the payment of cash to the secured lenders equal to the value of the collateral afforded them the “indubitable equivalent” and thus satisfied the “cram down” provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. The fact that the lenders would forego the benefit of later increases in the value of the collateral was not important, because the Bankruptcy Code protects a secured creditor’s “allowed secured claim” rather than the potential upside in the value of its collateral.

Appeal to the 3rd Circuit

In the Philadelphia Newspapers case, the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals granted expedited appellate review of the District Court’s decision, and heard oral argument on Dec. 15, 2009. Notably, the Loan Syndications and Trading Association and the Commercial Finance Association filed a joint amicus curiae brief explaining why the absolute right to credit bid is vital to secured credit markets.

Regardless of how the 3rd Circuit rules, the issue of secured creditors’ “bid in” rights is certain to remain a controversial subject, and to affect the dynamics of negotiation between secured lenders and their financially troubled borrowers.



 

The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.
 

View More Library Documents By...

 
McGuireWoods LLP
 
Chicago Office
Norfolk Office
Chicago Office
Chicago Office
Practice Area
 
Bankruptcy
 
McGuireWoods LLP Overview


 

Practice Area Resource Centers
Visit our Practice Area Resource Centers to view practice area specific content compiled from a variety of legal sources. Find related articles, podcasts, industry leader insights and much more. We currently offer the following Practice Areas: Litigation; Intellectual Property; Real Estate; Corporate Law; Criminal Law; Bankruptcy; Immigration; Business Law; Insurance; Taxation; Labor & Employment; Commercial Law; Medical Malpractice; Trusts & Estates; Securities; International Law ; Health Care; Environmental Law; Construction Law; Workers' Compensation