SDNY Denies Payment of Administrative Expense Claim by Relying on the Operative Document as a Whole and Rejecting a Statutory Rule of Construction

by Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

On December 13, 2012, Judge Vincent L. Briccetti from the United States District Court of the Southern District of New York denied the appellant Notes Trustee’s request to compel payment of an administrative expense claim. Upholding the bankruptcy court’s decision, Judge Briccetti ruled that rules of construction, such as the last antecedent rule, should not be applied because to do so would undermine the intent of the plan, and noted that such rules of construction “are less an ironclad rule than a guide to interpreting the [Plan], as are other interpretation guides and [are] subservient to the clearer meaning of the provision in the context of the entire agreement.” The case is Wilmington Trust Company v. The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc., Case No. 12-CV-5969 (VB) (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 13, 2012).


The Debtors, the Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company and its affiliates, filed for bankruptcy in December of 2010. The Notes Trustee, Wilmington Trust Company, was the trustee for certain unsecured notes issued by the Debtors. On December 19, 2011, the Debtors filed a Joint Plan of Reorganization pursuant to chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. In February of 2012 the initial plan was amended to address a “liquidity gap” resulting from the Debtors’ inability to secure financing in the amount required by the December 2011 plan.

The amended plan eliminated the proposed $40 million cash recovery pool for unsecured creditors; replacing it with an “Unsecured Creditor Contingent Recovery Pool” that provided for distributions to unsecured creditors, including note holders, only if certain contingencies were met. In particular, the amended plan provided that note holders would only recover if they voted to accept the amended plan. The bankruptcy court entered an order confirming the plan on March 13, 2012, over the objection of the Notes Trustee and without the note holders having voted to accept the plan. On March 8, 2012, the Notes Trustee served the Debtors with an administrative expense claim for approximately $1 million, and in April the Notes Trustee filed a motion to compel payment of that claim. The Notes Trustee contended that the conditional language in the amended plan requiring the Note Holders to vote in favor of the amended plan in order to receive payment, applied only to their recoveries and did not apply to payment of the Notes Trustee’s administrative expense claim.

The Bankruptcy Court orally denied the motion and entered a formal order denying the Notes Trustee’s motion on June 21, 2012. The Notes Trustee subsequently appealed, claiming that the bankruptcy court “erred by failing to apply the ‘last antecedent rule,’ whereby ‘relative or qualifying words or clauses in a [contract] ordinarily are to be applied to words or phrases immediately preceding, and are not to be construed as extending to others more remote, unless the intent clearly indicates otherwise.’”

Bankruptcy Rules of Construction

Section 102 of the Bankruptcy Code deals with rules of construction. Among other things, these rules of construction help interpret terms that are frequently used in the Bankruptcy Code. In addition to the specific rules outlined in section 102, general rules of statutory construction, which encompass far more than the limited situations covered by section 102, remain applicable in bankruptcy cases. The last antecedent rule is a statutory rule of construction used to govern statutes and operative doctrines. “The last antecedent rule of statutory construction provides that a modifying or restrictive word or clause contained in a statute is confined solely to the immediately preceding clause or last antecedent, unless something in the statute requires a different interpretation.” Stanton v City of Battle Creek, 647 NW2d 508 (2002).


Judge Briccetti upheld the ruling of the Bankruptcy Court, noting “the last antecedent rule should not be applied if to do so would undermine the intent or purpose of the operative document.” According to the court, the overall structure of the plan makes clear that the parties intended to place a condition on the Note Trustee’s entitlement to the recovery pool.

The Notes Trustee argued that the last antecedent rule renders the contingencies place on the Noteholders in the amended plan irrelevant to whether the Notes Trustee is entitled to an Allowed Administrative Claim.” The argument of the Notes Trustee hinged on the lack of a comma in the amended plan and relying on case law argued that “a corollary of [the last antecedent rule] is that when a modifier is not set off from prior items by a comma, that modifier applies only to the immediately preceding antecedent.” See In re Enron Credtors Recovery Corp., 651 F.3d 329, 335-36 (2d Cir. 2011). The court rejected this argument however and concluded that “the overall structure of the Plan makes clear that the parties intended… to place a condition on the Notes Trustee’s entitlement to an Allowed Administrative Claim.”


In denying the Note Trustee’s request to compel payment, the Court relied heavily on the intent or purpose of the operative document. By focusing more on the context of the entire agreement, the Court refused to apply a statutory rule of construction seemingly reducing its precedential value in future cases. This case, if used as precedent in the future may reduce a courts reliance on statutory rules of construction and instead focus issues of interpretation on the meaning intended by the parties or apparent through the operative document as a whole.

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.

© Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP

Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft 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.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

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.


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 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:

- 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.