Cal Dive International Inc. Launches Its Clawback Campaign
March 2, 2017, Delaware – Cal Dive International Inc., the defunct undersea oil drilling services firm,
launched a campaign of avoidance actions last month, seeking to clawback more than $20 million in payments made before it filed for Chapter 11 protection. On March 2, 2017, Cal Dive’s counsel, The Rosner Law Group LLC initiated almost 136 avoidance actions in the Delaware Bankruptcy Court to recover so-called preference payments under §§547 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code, made during the 90-day period before the debtor entered bankruptcy. In its complaint, subject to proof, Cal Dive Offshore Contractors, Inc., as debtor-in-possession also seeks to avoid and recover from a defendant or any other person or entity for whose benefit transfers were made under sections 548 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code any transfers that may have been fraudulent conveyances. The Court has not scheduled pre-trial conferences so far in the debtor’s bankruptcy cases.Before the wind-down of the debtors’ operations, the debtors and their non-debtor foreign affiliates constituted a global marine contractor that provided highly specialized manned diving, pipe lay and pipe burial, platform installation and salvage, and well-intervention services to a diverse customer base in the offshore oil and gas industry. The debtor is continuing to operate as debtors in possession. The case is In re Cal Dive International, Inc., Case No. 15-10458 in United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of’Delaware.
Creditor Defeats Recovery of Antecedent Credit Card Debt Under §550(b)(1) Because it Took Payment in Good Faith and Without Knowledge of its Voidability
Desmond v. Am. Express Centurion Bank, Inc. (In re Callas), Nos. 13 B 43900, 15…Read More
Trustee Failed to Demonstrate that a Genuine Issue of Material Fact Exists as to the Debtor’s Solvency on the Two Transfers
Roach v. Skidmore Coll. (In re Dunston), Nos. 14-41799-EJC, 15-04048-EJC, 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 282 (U.S….Read More
Tax Upset Sale is Not Avoidable Under Sec. 548(a)(1)(B)(i) Because the Price Defendant Paid for the Property Constituted Reasonably Equivalent Value
Crespo v. Abijah Tafari Immanuel (In re Crespo), Nos. 14-11629REF, 14-326, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 2073…Read More
Repayment of Debt – Not a Preference as the Transfer Did not Enable the Defendant to Receive More Than She Would Have If the Transfer Had Not Occurred.
New Mexico, September 26, 2017 – Debtor and her son were involved in a car…Read More
Defendant Provided “Value” for the Alleged Transfer By Paying For the Parties’ Living Expenses From the Transfer
Silagy v. Schroeder (In re Schroeder), Nos. 14-62604, 16-6017, 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 420 (U.S. Bankr….Read More