Page 21 - September2019_BarJournal
P. 21

BANKRUPTCY & COMMERCIAL LAW                                    FEATURE





            allows a creditor “to purchase the collateral   In  the  wake  of  Fisker,  many  practitioners   solely to foster competitive bidding. Among
            for what it considers the fair market price (up   and commentators speculated that the ruling   the most comforting of cases for buyers
            to the amount of its security interest) without   marked a possible expansion of section   hoping to acquire a target’s assets through
            committing additional cash to protect the loan.”   363(k)’s “for cause” exception. Five years later,   credit bidding is  In re Aéropostale, Inc.,
            RadLAX Gateway Hotel, LLC v. Amalgamated   however, it appears that those fears may have   555 B.R. 369 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2016), which
            Bank, 566 U.S. 639, 644 n.2 (2012). This protects   been overblown.    affirms the viability of credit bidding in
            against the undervaluation of the secured claim at                     the face of arguments solely focused on bid
            the sale. In re The Free Lance-Star Publ’g Co., 512   Fisker’s Impact: Five Years Later  chilling. In Aéropostale, the court explained
            B.R. 798, 804 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 2014).  In the five years since Fisker was decided,   that rulings limiting credit bidding because
                                               no reported decision has cited the opinion   of  bid  chilling  “almost  invariably  also
            Fisker                             to limit a secured lender’s right to credit bid   feature some other factor that supports
            The transaction leading to the attention-
            grabbing ruling in Fisker was the prepetition
            purchase of secured debt with an outstanding   Bruce Hennes has been
            principal amount of $168.5 million by Hybrid
            Tech Holdings, LLC (Hybrid) for only $25   chosen as a Lawdragon 100
            million. Fisker, 510 B.R. at 57. After the debtor
            filed for chapter 11 protection, Hybrid offered   Leading Legal Consultant &
            to purchase substantially all of the debtor’s        Strategist for 2019
            assets at a private sale, by credit bidding $75
            million of its secured claim. Id. The Official
            Committee of Unsecured Creditors, however,    Selected for excellence & leadership
            objected to the private sale and filed its own         to the legal profession.
            motion to sell the debtor’s assets at auction.
            Id. at 56. In connection with the dispute, the
            parties stipulated that: (1) if the court limited
            Hybrid’s ability to credit bid to $25 million or   Celebrating 30 years in
            less, the auction could create material value   business, Bruce has grown
            for the estate over and above Hybrid’s bid; and   Hennes Communications into
            (2) if the court did not limit Hybrid’s ability to   one of the few firms in North
            credit bid, the sale to Hybrid likely provided   America focused exclusively
            the most value, and as a result, the committee   on crisis management, crisis
            would withdraw its objection. Id. at 57–58.
             While the court determined that Hybrid   communications and litigation
            had a right to credit bid, it questioned whether   communications consulting.
            that right should be limited pursuant to section
            363(k). Id. at 59. Reasoning that allowing   If you have a situation,
            Hybrid to credit bid the entire debt amount   Hennes Communications
            would foreclose all bidding, including a bid   has a strategy.
            from a known “attractive” potential buyer,
            the court held that Hybrid’s right to credit bid
            should be limited. “[T]he ‘for cause’ basis upon
            which the Court is limiting Hybrid’s credit bid
            is that bidding will not only be chilled without
            the cap; bidding will be frozen.” Id. at 60.
             Despite that conclusion, the court continued
            its examination, finding multiple other
            justifications for modifying Hybrid’s right
            to credit bid, including: (a) the troublingly
            expedited schedule for the sale; (b) the court’s
            conclusion that, due to the damage the debtor’s
            collapse caused to individuals, companies, and   Terminal Tower  |  50 Public Square, Suite 3200  |  Cleveland, Ohio 44113
            taxpayers, Hybrid should not be permitted to     388 S. Main St.  |  Suite 400  |  Akron, Ohio 44311
            “short-circuit” the bankruptcy process; and (c)   www.crisiscommunications.com        216-321-7774
            the extent to which Hybrid’s claim was secured   Lawdragon is a legal media company that has grown a national reputation for recognizing the industry’s
            was unclear. Id. at 60–61.                        leading lawyers and leading providers of strategic and leadership advice.

            SEPTEMBER 2019                                                             CLEVELAND METROPOLITAN BAR JOURNAL | 21
   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26