TAKEAWAYS
Section 553 of the Bankruptcy Code requires “strict bilateral mutuality.”
Thus, a creditor cannot set off an obligation it owes to a bankrupt debtor against an obligation that the debtor owes to the creditor’s affiliate (a so-called triangular setoff).
Creditors cannot simply contract around section 553’s mutuality requirement it is a hard and fast prerequisite to any setoff effectuated in bankruptcy.
The Third Circuit’s recent decision in
In re Orexigen Therapeutics Inc., 990 F.3d 748 (3d Cir. 2021) holds that section 553 of the Bankruptcy Code, which governs creditor setoffs, requires “strict bilateral mutuality.” As a result, notwithstanding the parties’ contract, a creditor cannot set off an obligation it owes to a debtor in bankruptcy against an obligation that the debtor owes to the creditor’s affiliate (a so-called triangular setoff.)
POLITICO
Get the POLITICO Influence newsletter
Email
Sign Up
By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or updates from POLITICO and you agree to our privacy policy and terms of service. You can unsubscribe at any time and you can contact us here. This sign-up form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Presented by
CLAY HEADS TO K STREET: Former Congressman
Lacy Clay, who represented St. Louis in the House for two decades before his primary defeat last year by Rep.
Cori Bush (D-Mo.) is joining the law and lobbying firm
The courts thus far have proven somewhat more open to considering lawsuits alleging that colleges have breached their contracts with students and families though those cases will rise or fall based on situation-specific facts of how clearly a college promised that the education would be delivered in person. These are going to be tough cases to make, says Barry G. Burgdorf, special counsel at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman and former vice chancellor and general counsel at the University of Texas system. There s still the possibility that a few of them squeak through and get to a trial, though.
Lawsuits by the Hundreds
06 May 2021
Share
The recent assessment by the EU s scientific body, the Joint Research Centre, that nuclear energy does no more harm to human health or the environment than any other power-producing technology considered to be sustainable may be a sign of the green stamp of approval needed for the inclusion of nuclear in the EU Taxonomy on sustainable finance, write Elina Teplinsky, Vincent Zabielski and Victoria Judd, partner, special counsel and counsel, at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP.
Victoria Judd, Elina Teplinsky and Vincent Zabielski (Image: Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP) The EU Taxonomy Regulation, a system that classifies economic activities as environmentally sustainable to help the EU meet its Green Deal objectives, has emerged as an increasingly complex and politically fraught framework despite what should be a science-based approach to climate change mitigation.
Supreme Court justices signaled skepticism of assertions from small oil refineries that they should be allowed to extend lapsed waivers from mandates they use for biofuels.