Section 510(b) of the Bankruptcy Code provides a mechanism designed to preserve the creditor/shareholder risk allocation paradigm by categorically subordinating claims asserted against a debtor by equity holders arising from...more
Should a claim for appraisal rights brought by a former shareholder of a Chapter 11 debtor be subordinated under Section 510(b) of the Bankruptcy Code? According to the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, the...more
In the latest decision arising out of long-running disputes over confirmation of the Tribune Company’s Chapter 11 plan, the Third Circuit issued important new guidance concerning the enforceability of subordination agreements...more
“Unfair discrimination is rough justice. It exemplifies the Code’s tendency to replace stringent requirements with more flexible tests that increase the likelihood that a plan can be negotiated and confirmed,” announced Judge...more
The federal appeals court that oversees cases arising from California recently handed down an opinion that helps provide guidance to those employers trying to comply with collective bargaining agreements while simultaneously...more
A federal district court in Illinois held that participants in a multiemployer pension plan failed to plausibly allege that plan fiduciaries retaliated against them in violation of ERISA § 510 by refusing to consider their...more
The Ninth Circuit unanimously concluded that a trustee and lawyer for certain multiemployer funds violated ERISA § 510 by unlawfully firing a whistleblower in the funds’ collections department, but, in a split decision,...more
In the case In re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., 855 F.3d 459 (2d Cir. 2017), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a district court order subordinating the claims of former Lehman Brothers employees for...more
Section 510(b) of the Bankruptcy Code provides a mechanism designed to preserve the creditor/shareholder risk allocation paradigm by categorically subordinating most types of claims asserted against a debtor by equityholders...more
In In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc. 855 F.3d 459 (2d Cir. 2017), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a district court order subordinating the claims of former Lehman Bros. (“Lehman”) employees...more
The Draft Guidance may not significantly increase the number of 510(k)s filed, but likely would increase manufacturers’ procedural and documentation burdens. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA or the Agency) issued...more
Editor's Overview - This month, we have re-published an interview of our colleague Seth Safra discussing the Department of Labor’s final regulation concerning fiduciaries and conflicts of interest. In this interview,...more
A federal magistrate judge in Pennsylvania recommended that a class action complaint claiming that AlliedBarton terminated certain employees to prevent them from reaching eligibility for vacation benefits be dismissed as...more
Editor's Overview - In this month’s newsletter, our colleagues focus on two sets of legislative updates. First is a discussion of the IRS’s proposed Treasury Regulations prescribing rules under Section 457 of the...more
A federal court in Missouri was asked to determine whether a former employee proved a viable claim for retaliation under ERISA Section 510 by virtue of being terminated after she sent emails disparaging the company’s owner...more
The Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) employer shared responsibility mandate requires large employers to offer certain minimum health coverage to substantially all of their full-time employees, or potentially pay significant...more
Compliance with the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has resulted in increased health benefit costs for many employers. A recent court decision demonstrates that while programs to reduce the number of full-time employees may lower...more
In a case believed to be the first of its kind, a recent class action claim has accused an employer of reducing hours of employees to avoid having to provide health coverage as required under the Patient Protection and...more
Editor's Overview - As the summer draws to a close, this month's Newsletter previews three cases that the U.S. Supreme Court already has agreed to hear that ought to be of particular interest to ERISA plan sponsors and...more
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal on summary judgment of Plaintiff Rosemarie Cole’s claim that her employer, Permanente Medical Group, interfered with her receipt of pension benefits in violation of ERISA § 510....more
In the first lawsuit of its kind, a purported class of approximately 10,000 workers at Dave & Buster’s, the restaurant chain, filed a lawsuit in the Southern District of New York (Marin v. Dave & Buster’s, Inc., S.D.N.Y., No....more
In re Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc., 513 B.R. 624 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2014) – A purchaser of residential mortgage-backed securities filed proofs of claim based on alleged misrepresentations by the debtors in offering...more
On July 28, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a final guidance titled “The 510(k) Program: Evaluating Substantial Equivalence in Premarket Notifications [510(k)].” Device manufacturers should be aware of key...more
The Sixth Circuit (in a 2-1 decision) recently held that ERISA Section 510 does not protect unsolicited employee complaints. See Sexton v. Panel Processing, Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 8752 (6th Cir. May 9, 2014). Plaintiff...more
In a recent Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals decision successfully litigated by Laner Muchin, the Court addressed novel aspects of whether an employer interfered with employees’ benefit rights in violation of ERISA. The case...more