By: Michael L. Moskowitz and Melissa A. Guseynov

In a memorandum opinion, dated February 28, 2022, United States Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Grossman stated he will no longer entertain motions for loss mitigation in chapter 7 or 13 cases assigned to him. He explained the loss mitigation program was implemented in 2009 as a temporary administrative process due to the collapse of the mortgage industry and was never intended to become a “de facto right or a new form of bankruptcy protection.” Thus, while debtors and secured creditors may reach a consensual mortgage modification, it will be on a voluntary basis only and not court-sanctioned, as nothing in the Bankruptcy Code allows a Bankruptcy Court to “forcibly restructure a residential mortgage.”

Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP is proud to announce that founding partners Richard Weltman and Michael Moskowitz have once again been selected as Metro New York Area Super Lawyers for 2021. Both Richard and Michael have been recognized as top bankruptcy and debtor and creditors’ rights attorneys for several years.

By Richard E. Weltman

On December 1, 2020, several amendments to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure took effect. These amendments largely modify rules governing bankruptcy appeals, but also importantly impact Rules 2002 and 2004. Some court filing fees also increased slightly. 

Here are the rule changes:

Rule 2002, which governs notice to creditors and other parties, has been amended to (1) add cases under chapter 13 to the rule requiring notice of orders confirming plans; (2) distinguish between voluntary and involuntary cases in connection with notice to creditors with as-filed claims to conform with the proof of claim deadlines under Rule 3002(c); and (3) replace “pursuant” with “under” in several places, most likely to improve readability.

By: Michael L. Moskowitz

A Houston Bankruptcy Judge’s recent decision brings into question the need for – and efficacy of – the longstanding Jay Alix Protocol. In re McDermott Int’l Inc., 20-30336 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. May 20, 2020). Read the full opinion.

The J. Alix Protocol was originally developed to reconcile the dual nature of chief restructuring officers as both officers of the debtor – and thus insiders – and professionals providing bankruptcy restructuring services to the debtor’s estate. When the Bankruptcy Code initially was developed, the role of chief restructuring officer did not exist. As such, the Bankruptcy Code did not specifically address their retention which, on the surface, appears to fly in the face of section 327’s disinterested standard.¹ As a result of this inconsistency, and settlements between restructuring firm Jay Alix and Associates and the Office of the United States Trustee regarding the firm’s retention, the Jay Alix Protocol was established and has been widely followed since. In simple terms, the Jay Alix Protocol provides that debtors should retain restructuring professionals pursuant to section 363² of the Bankruptcy Code, while applying the relevant disclosure and conflict provisions of section 327(a).

By Michael L. Moskowitz and Adrienne Woods

Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP was retained by one of the few remaining dairies located in New York State to file a chapter 11 bankruptcy petition (“Debtor” or “Client”). Due to a downturn in the industry, Client was forced to close its doors after more than 150 years of operating its family-owned business. While production and other operating costs had steadily increased, sales had significantly decreased leaving the business unprofitable. When the bankruptcy was filed, it was anticipated the business would be sold to a previously-located purchaser (“Purchaser”) with whom Client had been negotiating for several months. Unfortunately, as Client’s business continued to lose customers and profitability fell, the Client was forced to renegotiate the sale price to an exponentially lower number and, ultimately, the Purchaser withdrew its offer entirely. As a result, the client was obliged to liquidate its few hard assets (the client’s business value was primarily tied to business relationships) and collect accounts receivable with a new goal of filing a liquidating plan under chapter 11.

By: Michael L. Moskowitz and Melissa A. Guseynov

In a recent memorandum decision, dated November 12, 2019, a New York Bankruptcy Judge held that filing a chapter 11 petition in order to obtain a 60-day extension of a closing date does not constitute bad faith. In re AAGS Holdings LLC, 19-13029 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Nov. 12, 2019). Read the full opinion here.

In AAGS Holdings, a limited liability corporation was under contract to buy certain real property. The contract of sale specifically stated that time was “of the essence.” In addition, if the closing did not take place by the date set forth in the contract, the seller could elect to terminate the contract and retain purchaser’s deposit.

By Michael L. Moskowitz and Melissa A. Guseynov

In a recent opinion, the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of New York ordered the reduction of post-petition attorney’s fees payable to a lender by nearly half. In re Manuel and Marion Maldonado, Case No. 19-30177 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. Aug. 6, 2019). Read the full opinion here.  

By Michael L. Moskowitz and Melissa A. Guseynov

In a recent opinion of note, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed the sole owner of a debtor corporation and his lawyers violated the automatic stay by seeking to prosecute claims belonging to debtor. Lowe v. Bowers (In re Nicole Gas Production, Ltd.), 916 F. 3d 566 (6th Cir. 2019). Read the full opinion here.

By Michael L. Moskowitz & Melissa A. Gueynov

In an opinion of interest to Chapter 11 practitioners, the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana recently held that the rental value of a chapter 11 debtor’s unused leased equipment qualifies for administrative expense status if there are intangible benefits to the estate.  Kimzey v. Premium Casing Equipment LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42744 (W.D. La. Mar. 14, 2018). Read the full opinion here.

Kimzey involved oil field equipment leased - but not used - by debtor before filing for bankruptcy relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Subsequent to its bankruptcy filing, debtor’s assets were purchased by a third party that did not buy the leased equipment. After the sale, lessor sought administrative expense status for the post-petition lease payments due, contending they were actual and necessary costs of preserving the bankruptcy estate.  

By Michael L. Moskowitz and Melissa A. Guseynov

In a recent opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed the lower courts’ rulings by holding that a debtor “receives” goods for purposes of section 503(b)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code when the debtor obtains physical possession of those goods. In re World Imports, Ltd., 862 F. 3d 338 (3d. Cir. 2017). Read the full opinion here.

Founding partners Richard E. Weltman and Michael L. Moskowitz are pleased to announce that effective May 15, 2017, the attorneys at Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP have become Counsel to the Chicago-based Chuhak & Tecson, P.C. law firm. This alliance allows both firms to develop new relationships and to expand Chuhak & Tecson’s presence in New York and New Jersey. Both firms remain independent.  

The new alliance enables Chuhak & Tecson to continue to offer its New York and New Jersey clients many business legal services including lender rights, banking, loan workouts related to conventional and SBA products, bankruptcy and creditor’s rights, counseling, foreclosures, loan documentation, real estate leasing, purchase and sale transactions, and commercial litigation.

Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP is proud to announce that founding partners Richard Weltman and Michael Moskowitz have both been selected as Metro New York Area Super Lawyers for 2017. This is the fourth consecutive year each has been recognized as a top bankruptcy/debtor and creditors’ rights attorney. This honor is a product of a rigorous investigative process by the publishers of Law and Politics. Attorneys are selected based on professional accomplishments, licensing and certifications, peer recognition and personal achievement. The final published list represents no more than 5% of the lawyers in each state. The firm is also proud to announce that Melissa Guseynov, an associate of the firm, has been selected as a New York Metro Rising Star! This selection is limited to no more than 2.5% of the attorneys in New York State. The Super Lawyers objective is to create a credible list of outstanding attorneys, and the lawyers of Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP are proud to be recognized for their hard work and client dedication.

Please help welcome our newest team member, Melissa Dlugokencky!

Melissa will be working closely with our bankruptcy, litigation and foreclosure attorneys. She brings to Weltman & Moskowitz proven legal assisting skills, an undergraduate degree from Dowling College and her paralegal certification from Queens College. Before joining us, Melissa concentrated on litigation and transactional matters at Cohen & Slamowitz (n/k/a Selip  & Styloanou, LLP), and Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey & Moskovits, P.C. You can reach Melissa at md@weltmosk.com.  

We hope you’ll say hello to Melissa the next time you call or stop in.  

Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP is proud to announce that Richard Weltman and Michael Moskowitz have both been selected as Metro New York Area Super Lawyers for 2016. This is the third consecutive year each has been recognized as a top bankruptcy/debtor and creditors’ rights attorney. This honor is a product of a rigorous investigative process by the publishers of Law and Politics. Attorneys are selected based on professional accomplishments, licensing and certifications, peer recognition and personal achievement. The final published list represents no more than 5% of the lawyers in each state. The Super Lawyers objective is to create a credible list of outstanding attorneys, and the partners of Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP are proud to be recognized for their hard work and client dedication.

By Michael L. Moskowitz

We have previously reported on Bernard Madoff’s massive Ponzi scheme and the resultant “clawback” lawsuits pending in the bankruptcy and district courts for the Southern District of New York.

In a decision dated March 14, 2016, Bankruptcy Judge Stuart Bernstein granted partial relief to an investment fund seeking to dismiss a “clawback” lawsuit filed by Irving Picard, the trustee for Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities, LLC (“BLMIS”). Judge Bernstein found that Trustee Picard could not recover fictitious profits and principal recoveries in the six years before bankruptcy because there was no showing the investment firm had “actual” knowledge of Madoff’s fraud.

By Richard E. Weltman and Melissa A. Guseynov

When creditors learn that an entity that owes them money has filed for bankruptcy protection, they often fear their claims will remain unpaid or that they will only collect pennies on the dollar. And while that is typically the outcome for unsecured claimants, in certain circumstances creditors may be able to recover a substantial portion of their debt. In fact, as further described below, with effective counsel, a creditor may recover its claim in full.

By Michael L. Moskowitz and Michele K. Jaspan

Attorneys who litigate are often faced with statutory deadlines. When the need arises to extend deadlines, it is not unusual for extensions to be routinely granted between counsel, often informally. But how often do bankruptcy practitioners, in particular, have stipulations extending statutory deadlines “So Ordered” by the court? Apparently, not often enough.

Wellness International Network Ltd. v. Sharif

Bankruptcy Judges May Render Final Decisions on Legal Disputes Arising in Bankruptcy if All Parties Consent

By Michael L. Moskowitz and Melissa A. Guseynov

On May 26, 2015, in Wellness International Network Ltd. v. Sharif, the Supreme Court held that Article III of the United States Constitution permits bankruptcy judges to adjudicate so called “Stern” claims, with the parties’ knowing and voluntary consent. Wellness International Network Ltd. v. Sharif, 135 S.Ct. 1932 (2015).   

Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank 

Orders Denying Bankruptcy Plan Confirmation
are Not Final Orders for Purposes of Appeal

 By Richard E. Weltman and Melissa A. Guseynov

This term, in Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank, the United States Supreme Court unanimously decided that orders denying plan confirmation do not constitute final orders from which an appeal may be immediately taken as a matter of right.  The decision resolves a significant circuit split and may shift the balance of power in bankruptcy cases against debtors seeking to confirm plans and emerge from the bankruptcy process on their own terms.

Baker Botts LLP v. Asarco LLC

Litigation Fees Incurred By Counsel in Defense of Bankruptcy Fee Application are not Compensable

By Michael L. Moskowitz and Michele K. Jaspan

The Supreme Court recently ruled that bankruptcy courts may not award legal fees to professionals for the costs incurred in defending their fees. The decision in Baker Botts, LLP v. ASARCO, LLC, written by Justice Clarence Thomas for the majority, held that section 330(a) of the United States Code does not give bankruptcy courts the discretion to award fee-defense fees under any circumstances. Thus, the Supreme Court affirmed the ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit which reversed the bankruptcy court’s fee award to Debtor’s counsel for costs incurred in defense of its $120 million fee application.  The Baker Botts firm sought to recover in excess of $5 million for time spent litigating in defense of their fee application in Asarco’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy case.

by Richard E. Weltman

{3:36 minutes to read} When representing a creditor in a bankruptcy case, it helps when counsel understands that being told it is “too late” to file a claim may not be the last word. The filing of a late claim may still be possible in certain circumstances. 

Our client, a personal injury attorney, represented the administrator of his wife’s estate in a wrongful death lawsuit. The decedent was severely burned when her clothing caught fire.

Founding partners Richard E. Weltman & Michael L. Moskowitz are pleased to announce that effective January 1, 2015, the attorneys at Weltman & Moskowitz have become Counsel to the New Jersey-based Saiber law firm. This alliance will allow both firms to develop new relationships and opportunities.

By Michael L. Moskowitz

In our previous article, we shared the story of a personal injury attorney that was recently sued in an adversary proceeding filed in the United States bankruptcy court. Weltman & Moskowitz successfully established that the complaint was without merit and Plaintiff agreed to withdraw the complaint before answers were required to be filed or discovery ensued. In doing so, we saved our client the time and expense associated with protracted litigation.. Today, we bring you the story of another client of ours, a large regional banking institution, in the same position with the same successful results.

By Michael L. Moskowitz

The New York Supreme Court Appellate Division for the Second Department recently clarified that New York’s CPLR§ 3408, which requires parties in a residential foreclosure action to participate in a settlement conference, was not applicable where the mortgage collateralized a personal guaranty of a commercial loan to a corporation. Independence Bank v. Valentine, 113 A.D. 3d 62 (2d. Dept 2013).  

New York’s Office of Court Administration recently announced relief for lenders and homeowners frustrated by high case volume delays affecting mandatory foreclosure settlement conferences in certain courts. Litigants will soon enjoy immediate and direct access to judges at these conferences in Kings, Queens, Nassau and Suffolk counties, the four counties with the highest foreclosure case volumes in the state.

The United States Judicial Conference recently approved changes to the federal court miscellaneous fee schedules, including certain bankruptcy filing fees.

As of  Sunday, June 1, 2014, the filing fees for most bankruptcy matters will rise. These fees are collected from both debtors and creditors accessing the federal bankruptcy courts, whether in person or online.

In 2005, after 12 years of Congressional wrangling, Congress passed the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (“BAPCPA”).

The avowed purpose of BAPCPA was to reduce abusive filings by limiting consumer debtor’s access to chapter 7 relief. The financial service industry argued the change was needed to curb consumers’ “profligate spending” and perceived lax bankruptcy rules. By reducing access to chapter 7, lenders suggested that they would see increased distribution from those new chapter 13 cases due to limitations placed upon chapter 7 flowing from the so-called “means test.”

Attached is a wonderful reference guide published by the City Bar Justice Center titled Understanding Reaffirmation Agreements. A reaffirmation agreement is a contract between a debtor and creditor wherein the debtor agrees the creditor’s debt will survive the bankruptcy discharge. The authority for entry into a reaffirmation agreement can be found in 11 U.S.C. §524(c). Debtors and creditors alike are typically barraged with misinformation regarding when reaffirmation agreements are appropriate.

Michael Moskowitz will be a featured speaker at the New York State Bar Association’s Annual Meeting on January 29, 2014. Mr. Moskowitz’s panel, one of  three to be presented by the Young Lawyers Section, will focus on consumer and corporate bankruptcy issues.  insert excerpt info here.

Between 1998 and 2007, home mortgage debt nearly tripled from 4 trillion dollars to 10 trillion dollars. This mortgage boom resulted from easy lending and questionable subprime market practices. When the housing bubble burst, the economy tumbled. Many borrowers found themselves both unable to make mortgage payments and owners of real property worth less than what they owed. In response, many homeowners filed bankruptcy petitions either under chapter 7 to surrender their home, or chapter 13 to stop a foreclosure, repay pre-petition arrears, and hold on to their home.

By Michael L. Moskowitz

On August 15, 2013, the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference of the United States released their proposed amendments to the Bankruptcy Rules and Forms. The proposed amendments, rules committee reports, and other information are posted on the Judiciary’s website.  

As credit markets tighten, professionals and business owners alike have trouble finding access to credit to fund and grow business operations. Media reports indicate loans are harder to obtain and asset-to-debt ratios are stricter than ever. As cash dwindles the debt load rises. For the overwhelmed business owner bankruptcy is only one answer. There are other alternatives.

On December 22, 2010, an upstate New York bankruptcy court in an adversary proceeding filed by debtor Christopher Weber against SEFCU (“Credit Union”), granted Credit Union’s motion for summary judgment. 

PaperStreet Web Design's development team just wrapped up the brand new re-design of weltmosk.com.   The new site not only has a modern design but is using the latest web technologies, JavaScript libraries, and web standards.

FAIR LAWN, NJ - Richard E. Weltman, a New York and New Jersey business attorney concentrating on creditor protection, debt relief, and business counseling, and founding member of the law firm of Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP, was recently acknowledged by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey for his service to New Jersey's low-income consumers in need of debt relief and bankruptcy services.

NEW YORK, NY - A chapter 7 debtor recently filed a motion before Bankruptcy Judge Alan Trust in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of New York seeking to avoid Pentagon Federal Credit Union's (PenFed) second mortgage (also known as "lien-stripping"). Weltman & Moskowitz successfully opposed debtor's motion on both procedural and substantive grounds, ensuring that PenFed's mortgage was enforced as written.

NEW YORK, NY - On November 26, 2008, Big box retailer bankruptcy filings are expected to mushroom following predicted tepid holiday sales this year, posing vexing challenges for their suppliers.

NEW YORK, NY - On September 25, 2008, Michael L. Moskowitz, a founding member of the law firm of Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP, presented an informative seminar to Deloitte, LLP professionals and support personnel at their New York City headquarters. Deloitte, LLP is one of the largest accounting and consulting firms in the world. The seminar was sponsored by the Deloitte Women's Initiative Learning and Development Committee.

NEW YORK, NY - Richard E. Weltman, a founding member of the law firm of Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP, recently presented an informative seminar to members of the Estate Planning Committee of the New York State Society of Certified Public Accountants at their FAE Conference Center in New York City.

Whether you sell goods or services, your chance of doing business with a company now or soon to be embroiled in bankruptcy proceedings is probably not as remote as you'd hope it to be. While it may not be your job to keep another business from falling in with the chapter 7 or chapter 11 crowd, it makes sense to limit your exposure to the financial woes of a key customer or supplier.

NEW YORK, NY Despite claims earlier this year that bankruptcy practice would return to normal, the bottom is continuing to fall out.

NEW YORK, NY - Richard E. Weltman and Michael L. Moskowitz, founding members of Weltman & Moskowitz, LLP, presented a practical seminar on recent changes to the Bankruptcy Code in a Half-Day Bankruptcy Conference to the New York State Society of Certified Public Accountants at their FAE Conference Center.

NEW YORK, NY - By a vote of 302 to 126, on April 14, 2005, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bankruptcy reform bill which will become, for the most part, effective 180 days after it is signed into law by President Bush on April 20. The reform bill, which has stalled in Congress for more than seven years, will make filing for bankruptcy more difficult and costly, and will enhance the rights of creditors.