Managed and supervised the legal team at Bank One (later acquired by J.P. Morgan Chase) with responsibility for troubled loans involving managed assets, commercial bank, and portfolio management clients. Team included sixteen attorneys and paralegals in five locations across the country.
Other bankruptcy representations involving the Partners include:
Pacific Gas & Electric in a corporate reorganization proceeding presenting questions of bankruptcy law, federal preemption, and state utility regulation. PG&E Corp. v. California PUC, 543 U.S. 956 (2004); PG&E Corp. v. State of California, 549 U.S. 882 (2006). See 2006 WL 1894999 (brief) (U.S. Supreme Court).
Creditors of a communications company in a case presenting the question whether the Federal Communications Commission acted lawfully in retroactively cancelling communications licenses based on the licensee’s failure to make timely installment payments while in Chapter 11 proceedings. FCC v. NextWave Personal Communications, Inc., 537 U.S. 293 (2003).
The Connecticut Bar Association and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys in a case involving a constitutional challenge to provisions of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Connecticut Bar Ass'n v. U.S., 620 F.3d 81 (2d Cir. 2010); Adams v. Zenas Zelotes, 606 F.3d 34 (2d Cir. 2010).
The National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys in appeals presenting constitutional challenges to certain provisions of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P.A. v. U.S., 130 S.Ct. 1324 (2010); Olsen v. Mukasey, Nos. 07-35616, 07-35762 (filed Jan. 17, 2008). See 2008 WL 592086 (brief) (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit).
The National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys in a statutory construction case involving the specified expense deduction for vehicle-ownership costs under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code. Ransom v. FIA Card Services, N.A., 131 S. Ct. 716 (2011).
USAmeribank in a dispute concerning its obligation, if any, to share the proceeds of a set-off with lending syndicate members as borrower’s criminal fraud unfolded where USAB purchased participations in the loan. USAmeriBank vs. Sovereign Bank, Case No. 2D12-389 (2 Dist. Ct. App. Fl.).
Senior executives at the Tribune Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates in the Tribune Bankruptcy, including Consolidated Multidistrict Action, 11 MD 2296 (WHP) and 12 MC 2296 (WHP).
A venture capital firm in a securities fraud suit against a media technology provider that declared bankruptcy during the suit.