SunEdison’s CEO Opposes Unsecured Creditor’s Clawback Motion
December 22, 2016, New York – During the last week, SunEdison CEO John S. Dubel filed a supplemental declaration in the New York court testifying that the renewable energy giant may have substantial and plausible claims against its yieldco subsidiaries and allowing unsecured creditors to pursue them would hamper a joint process seeking sale or reorganization. John S. Dubel alleged that it was best for any potential claims against the yieldcos to remain under the debtor’s control so as not to upset negotiations over a possible sale transaction or reorganization under a plan. The official committee of unsecured creditors in the clawback motion argued that projects, payments, and services transferred to publicly traded yieldcos TerraForm Power Inc. and TerraForm Global Inc. were done when SunEdison was already insolvent, and there was a huge difference between the equity values it received in exchange.
SunEdison, which develops renewable energy products around the world, filed for Chapter 11 protection in April 2016. The bankruptcy case is In re SunEdison Inc., case number 1:16-bk-10992, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.
Trustee Can Not Recover the Transfers Made by the Debtor’s President to Himself For Lack of Evidence
Rentas v. Gomez (In re Indrescom Sec. Tech. Inc.), No. 12-07047, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 3618…Read More
Second Circuit – Bankruptcy Court Did Not Abuse its Discretion in Excluding the Documentary Evidence While Granting Judgment For Trustee
John Nagle Co. v. McCarthy (In re Cousins Fish Mkt., Inc.), No. 15-3710-bk, 2016 U.S….Read More
A. Bongiorno, Ex-Madoff Employee, to Assist Trustee in Locating Stolen Funds in the Madoff Ponzi Scheme
New York, August 28, 2016 – Annette Bongiorno, a former Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities…Read More
Federal and State Tax Liens Do Not Attach to Fraudulent Conveyance Actions
Richardson v. Green (In re THR & Assocs.), Nos. 12-72022, 14-07008, 2016 Bankr. LEXIS 2121…Read More
Mere Fact That a Defendant is in Default Does Not Entitle the Plaintiff to a Default Judgment.
Fort v. Branch Banking & Tr. Co. (In re JAT, Inc.), Nos. 13-07552-HB, 15-80205-HB, 2016…Read More