Birmingham v. PNC Bank, N.A.

(United States Third Circuit) – In a Chapter 13 voluntary bankruptcy case, the district court’s determination, that the provisions of debtor’s Deed of Trust does not allow debtor to bifurcate is affirmed, where reference in the Deed of Trust to escrow funds, insurance proceeds, or miscellaneous proceeds constitutes incidental property for purposes of 11 U.S.C. section 1322(b)(2), which entitles mortgagor-defendant to anti-modification protection under section 1322(b)(2).

Trikona Advisers Limited v. Chugh

(California Court of Appeal) – In a complaint alleging breach of fiduciary duty by defendant, a former partner and fifty percent owner of plaintiff corporation, the district court’s grant of summary judgment to defendants is affirmed over plaintiff’s meritless arguments that: 1) the district court incorrectly applied the doctrine of collateral estoppel; and 2) Chapter 15 of the United States Bankruptcy Code prevents the district court from giving preclusive effect to the Cayman court’s factual findings.

Marblegate Asset Mgmt., LLC v. Educ. Mgmt. Fin. Corp.

(United States First Circuit) – In an appeal arising out a company’s debt restructuring, the district court’s holding, that a series of transactions meant to restructure defendant’s debt over the objections of certain noteholders violated Section 316(b) of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, 15 U.S.C. section 77ppp(b), is vacated where section 316(b) prohibits only non‐consensual amendments to an indenture’s core payment terms.

Peaje Investments LLC v. Garcia-Padilla

(United States First Circuit) – In consolidated appeals involving the application of certain provisions of the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (PROMESA), 48 U.S.C. sections 2101-2241, a statute enacted by Congress in June 2016 to address Puerto Rico’s financial crisis, the district court’s judgment is: 1) affirmed as to denial of Peaje Investments LLC’s lift-stay motion where plaintiff failed to set forth a legally sufficient claim of ’cause’ to lift the PROMESA stay; and 2) vacated as to denial of other plaintiffs’ lift-stay motion where they presented sufficient allegations to entitle them to a hearing.

Lynch v. Gabriel Jackson

(United States Fourth Circuit) – In an action arising out of a petition for Chapter 7 bankruptcy relief, the bankruptcy court’s denial of the Bankruptcy Administrator’s motion to dismiss the case as an abuse because the debtors used the National and Local Standard amounts for certain categories of expenses rather than the actual amount of their expenses, which were less than the standardized amounts, is affirmed where 11 U.S.C. section 707(b)(2) permits a debtor to take the full National and Local Standard amounts for a category of expenses if they incur an expense in that category.

Kupfer v. Salma

(United States Ninth Circuit) – In an action concerning the statutory cap on a landlord’s claims against a tenant in bankruptcy as set forth in § 502(b)(6), the district court is vacated and remanded when the court uses an all-or-nothing approach because the cap applies only to claims that result directly from the termination of a lease, but not to collateral claims.