Lenders to SPEs: Be Aware, You May Not Have Standing to Appeal a Substantive Consolidation Order

by Dechert LLP
Contact

Dechert LLP

A substantive non-consolidation opinion is a common feature of structured finance transactions in the U.S. Most, if not all, opine as to what a bankruptcy court would do, but express no opinion on the appellate process. We would venture a guess that most opinion recipients assume that if the bankruptcy court gets it wrong, their rights will be vindicated on appeal. The Eighth Circuit opinion in Opportunity Finance1 casts a troubling shadow over that assumption.

Background

The case grew out of the massive Ponzi scheme ran by Thomas Petters. To fund a multi-billion dollar Ponzi scheme, Mr. Petters utilized eight special purpose entities (SPEs) to raise approximately US$30 billion over a seven year period. When the scheme collapsed, the various Petters entities, including the SPEs filed for bankruptcy. Some of the lenders to the SPEs were direct lenders while others made indirect loans. All of the lenders were net winners and therefore did not file proofs of claims in the bankruptcy case. 

The chapter 7 bankruptcy trustee brought separate avoidance actions against the lenders seeking to recover about US$5.2 billion in payments made to them by the SPEs. Later on, however, the trustee sought the substantive consolidation of the debtors, including the SPEs. The bankruptcy court granted the motion and the district court dismissed the appeal holding that the lenders did not qualify as “persons aggrieved” by the consolidation order and thus, lacked standing to appeal. The lenders appealed to the Eighth Circuit.

The Court of Appeals Opinion

The Eighth Circuit panel was split, with the majority affirming the dismissal of the appeal and the minority voting to reverse. The lenders argued that the consolidation order affected their rights in two ways. First, prior to consolidation, each SPE had only one creditor-the relevant defendant lender. Since certain fraudulent transfer actions (i.e. those brought under section 544(b)) require the trustee to establish the existence of an unpaid creditor, the trustee, absent consolidation, lacked standing to avoid transfers made by the SPEs. Second, the consolidation order transformed certain lenders, with respect of certain of the claims, from subsequent transferees to initial transferees, thus eliminating their ability to argue good faith defense under section 550(b)(1). Both the majority and the minority agreed with said impact of the consolidation order on the lenders. 

Nonetheless, the majority held that the lenders were not “persons aggrieved” and thus lacked standing to appeal. First, the majority analogized the consolidation order to one allowing litigation to proceed. Allowing litigation to proceed does not make a defendant a “person aggrieved” and by implication, nor does an order stripping defenses. Second, the harm caused to the lenders does not create direct pecuniary harm required to satisfy the “person aggrieved” standard since the harm to the lenders is several steps removed; to suffer a pecuniary harm the trustee must prevail in the lawsuit, the lenders must pay the judgment and then file a claim. This possibility of harm does not satisfy the standard the majority held. Finally, the majority viewed the lenders as pursuing interests “antithetical to the primary purposes of the Bankruptcy Code” since they are attempting to avoid liability and as having interests that are not central to the bankruptcy process; the “person aggrieved” standard is used to avoid prolonging bankruptcy needlessly by parties whose interests are not central to the case. 

The minority disagreed. The minority argued that the “person aggrieved” standard is satisfied when the order or judgment at hand impairs parties’ rights. The consolidation order, resulting in loss of two significant defenses, clearly turns the lenders to persons aggrieved. First, an order that strips defenses goes beyond simply allowing a litigation to proceed; it affects substantive rights. An order that strips defenses “changes the probability that the party will win the lawsuit.” Second, the defenses that were stripped by the consolidation order are bankruptcy code statutory defenses. Therefore, it cannot be argued, as the majority does, that the lenders’ interests are “antithetical to the goals of bankruptcy.” Finally, the lenders, in the minority view, are not “marginally interested parties” as viewed by the majority. In the minority’s view, the attempt to avoid and recover billions of dollars is not merely a “satellite issue” and the “consolidation order fundamentally alters the entire Petters bankruptcy proceeding.”

What’s Next?

There is no record of a petition for rehearing, for an en banc review or for a Supreme Court review. Being the first Court of Appels’ opinion on the subject, it could prove influential. Since, however, it is not binding outside of the Eighth Circuit, the split opinion provides fertile ground for litigation. Lenders to SPEs should be aware that the right to appeal they probably took for granted, may face stiff opposition in the future.

Footnotes

1) Opportunity Finance, LLC v. Kelley, 822 F.3d 451 (8th Cir. 2016). The opinion is also available here.
 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Dechert LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Dechert LLP
Contact
more
less

Dechert LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!