BarbriSFCourseDetails

Course Details

This CLE course will discuss commonly attacked transactions such as payments to trade creditors, loan workouts, and payments to insiders. The panel will analyze statutory defenses and other key defenses such as earmarking, critical vendor, mere conduit, assumed contract, claim waivers, and setoffs.

Description

Bankruptcy litigators representing clients in preference litigation must anticipate specific preference claims that arise in commonly attacked transactions such as payments to trade creditors, loan workouts, and payments to insiders.

Several cases in recent years have refined, limited, or expanded the standards, defenses, and limitations on preference actions. Our panel will discuss commonly attacked transactions such as payments to trade creditors, workouts, and payments to insiders.

The panel will analyze statutory defenses and other key defenses such as earmarking, critical vendor, mere conduit, assumed contract, claim waivers, and setoffs, and will discuss strategies to minimize exposure to preference claims.

Listen as our authoritative panel of bankruptcy practitioners guides you through the key defenses to preference actions and discusses recent developments in preference litigation and best practices for minimizing preference liability.

Outline

  1. Statutory preference defenses
    • New value
    • Ordinary course of business
    • Contemporaneous exchange
  2. Specific preference claims and other defenses
    • Loan workouts
    • Payments to corporate insiders
    • Motions to dismiss
    • Earmarking
    • Mere conduit defense
    • Involuntary bankruptcy issues
    • 503(b)(9) effect on new value
    • Assumed contract defense
    • Critical vendor defense
    • Claim waivers
    • Setoff issues

Benefits

The panel will review these and other notable questions:

  • What are best practices for preventing a creditor from becoming a target of a preference action?
  • What steps can be taken to minimize or eliminate preference exposure if a demand is received or an action is commenced?
  • What is the standard for bringing preference actions against corporate insiders? Why is the burden tougher to establish these claims?