by Justin A. Saporito, Law Clerk
Aramid Entertainment Fund, Limited filed for Chapter 11 protection in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York on June 13, 2014. Debtor has declared assets of $237.3 million and consolidated debt of $11.5 million. Debtor was assigned case number 1:14-bk-11802, a judge has yet to be assigned. Approximately 96 creditors were listed in the petition; among them are several other Aramid entities including Aramid Liquidating Trust, Ltd. and Aramid Entertainment, Inc. which jointly filed with the Debtor and were assigned consecutive case numbers.
Aramid Entertainment Fund, Limited is part of Aramid Capital Partners, LLP, a London based hedge fund that specializes in financing movies. According to their website, Aramid Capital has provided financing for thirty-two (32) movies including Paranormal Activity, W., and How to Lose Friends & Alienate People. Please click here for a list of their productions.
Debtor filed for Chapter 11 protection due to the cost of ongoing litigation against several of its borrowers who failed to repay loans or violated film-financing agreements. One such suit began in February 2012 and is over an alleged $44 million in losses. Debtor invested $22 million in a financing deal between Relativity Media, LLC and Sony Pictures. Debtor alleges that executives from Fortress Investment Group, LLC used Aramid’s confidential information, which was allegedly obtained during a 2010 portfolio review as part of a proposed purchase of Debtor’s assets, to make a deal with Sony that destroyed Debtor’s investments.
The Riverhounds Event Center, L.P. and Riverhounds Acquisition Group, L.P., the limited partnerships that own and operate Highmark Stadium and the Pittsburgh Riverhounds Professional Soccer Club respectively, jointly declared voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy on March 26, 2014. Debtors filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, assigned case numbers 2:14-bk-21180 and 2:14-bk-21181 respectively. Both cases have been assigned to the Honorable Jeffery A. Deller.
The Riverhounds Event Center, L.P. owns and operates the newly constructed Highmark Stadium located in the South Side area of Pittsburgh and claims assets ranging from $1 million to $10 million with liabilities between $10 million and $50 million. Of those liabilities, $7.2 million is mortgage debt and $1.5 million in bank loans.
The Riverhounds Acquisition Group, L.P. is the limited partnership that owns the Pittsburgh Riverhounds minor league soccer team and claims assets ranging from $500,000 to $1 million with liabilities between $1 million and $10 million. The Pittsburgh Riverhounds was founded in 1999 and currently plays in the United Soccer Leagues. Much of the debt leading up to the bankruptcy was incurred in 2012-2013 during the construction of Highmark Stadium. The bankruptcy is not expected to affect the 2014 season.
Debtors share some creditors such as Shallenberger Construction, Inc., First National Bank of Pennsylvania, and Urban Redevelopment Association of Pittsburgh. Both debtors are represented by John M. Steiner of Leech Tishman Fuscaldo & Lampl, LLC.
By: Stephen Krug, Law Clerk
The various entities that comprise the Quiznos sandwich chain (“debtors”) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on March 14, 2014. A motion filed by debtors for joint administration of the cases was granted on March 17, and the case has been assigned to the Honorable Peter J. Walsh.
While debtors’ liabilities range from $500 million to $1 billion, the assets are only estimated to fall between $0 and $50,000. However, Debtors maintain that, although assets are low and 10,001 to 25,000 creditors exist, funds will be available for distribution to unsecured creditors. U.S. Bank National Association, as administrative agent and collateral agent under debtors’ second lien financing facility, is the largest unsecured claimant with a claim for approximately $174 million. Horizon Media Inc., MG-1005, LLC, and ESPN Inc. also hold substantial unsecured claims.
Debtors have proposed a pre-packaged reorganization plan that would slash debt by more than $400 million and would permit the handful of company-owned sandwich shops to remain operational. Sandwich stores operated by franchisees are not part of the bankruptcy proceedings and thus are not provided for in the pre-packaged plan.
Debtors hope to emerge from bankruptcy more viable than ever. Moving forward, debtors hope to reduce food costs and place more of an emphasis on advertising.
As is almost always the case, principals of a distressed business have personally guaranteed the debt on a credit line or property or equipment lease. When a business files bankruptcy, an automatic stay is imposed against any adverse actions taken against the business entity, the Debtor. But what about the owners of the business? Often, I find myself seeking to extend the automatic stay injunction to those principals. This issue came up in a recent case we had pending in the Fourth Circuit. We were compelled to find case law regarding the standard for relief.
A factual example would be as follows: A distressed business ABC Recylcing owns a building, and the building has a mortgage on it in favor of Meanie Bank, N.A. The business falls behind on payments. Meanie Bank initiates a foreclosure action to set an auction to sell the building. Jake, the owner of the business had to sign a guaranty in order for ABC Recycling to get the loan with Meanie Bank. ABC Recycling still operates with the faint hopes of reorganizing through a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Once the Chapter 11 is filed, the foreclosure action is stayed as to ABC Recycling, but now the Meanie Bank is going after Jake. Help, my clients say.
ISSUE: Pursuant 11 U.S.C. §105 and §362 of the Bankruptcy Code, is a court likely to grant an injunction to protect the principal of a bankrupt business?
CONCLUSION: Where the principal Jack is a primary guarantor of the mortgage and Meanie Bank now intends to secure a judgment against the principal, the principal will only be able to obtain an injunction by demonstrating a mutuality of identity with the Debtor such that allowing Meanie Bank to proceed against Jake will substantially deprive the Debtor of a primary asset (its owner’s time and attention). In Plain English, how important is the principal Jake to the Debtor’s operations? A four-part test is employed to make that determination.
While automatic stay proceedings are usually only available to the Debtor, under unusual circumstances, the Fourth Circuit has held that the Bankruptcy Court can enjoin proceedings against third parties. In re F.T.L. Inc., 152 B.R. 61 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 1993). However, where no compelling or unusual circumstances exist, then under §362 the Debtor’s guarantors must file their own bankruptcy petition in order to be protected by the Bankruptcy laws. Id. at 63. (this also happens often).
A court is only likely to grant an injunction to a third party non-debtor principal in the unusual circumstance that it is evident that the identity of the debtor and the non-debtor third party is so interconnected that it is clear that the creditor is proceeding against the debtor. Under such circumstances, the court may apply a four-part test and equitably grant an injunction where the court finds that:
- the plaintiff principal has a greater likelihood of succeeding on the merits;
- plaintiff principal has shown that lack of relief will result in irreparable injury;
- an injunction will not substantially harm other interested parties, and;
- preserving the status quo until the merits of the controversy is decided will serve public interests. Id.
In re F.T.L., the primary secured creditor to a car wash company debtor, secured a judgment lien against the debtor’s guarantors, the plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are the primary owners and guarantors of the car wash and the creditor perfected its lien against plaintiffs’ personal residence. Id. at 62. Noting that the collection activities against the owners arose from the car wash’s debt to the creditor, the court applied the four-part test and found that the debtor was likely to succeed on the merits by proposing a confirmable chapter 11 plan; the debtor’s chapter 11 plan would be impossible if the owners were forced to file their own chapter 11 petition; very little harm was likely to come to the creditor if it was enjoined from collection activities against the owner, and; lastly the creditors as a whole were best served if the debtor were allowed to propose a plan for reorganization. Id. The Court extended the injunction to the owners.
If you own a business and are wondering the same questions, you should review the facts and circumstances of your workout with your attorney. I think, by and large, the automatic stay is difficult to extend in Bankruptcy Court. You have to make a really compelling argument that the principal will be so consumed with his or her own bankruptcy that the Chapter 11 reorganization will suffer.
Penn Data Services, Inc. filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on October 1st, 2013 in the Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh). The case has been assigned to the Honorable Judge Carlota M. Bohm under case number 2:13-bk-24153. A summary of the docket can be found here.
This is the debtor’s 2nd consecutive voluntary filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, having previously filed over a year ago on August 21st, 2012 (that is referred to as a “Chapter 22” by those in the industry). That case was assigned case # 2:12-bk-24156 and was also overseen by Judge Bohm. The 2012 case was dismissed on August 30th, 2013 for failure to timely file a Chapter 11 Plan and Disclosure Statement. A docket summary of the initial filing for the 2012 case can be found here.
Penn Data Services, Inc. is a billing services company founded in 1996 and located in Natrona Heights, PA. The debtor claims assets of less than $50,000 with liabilities between $50,000 and $100,000. Christopher M. Frye of Steidl & Steinberg P.C. is again representing the debtor, having been debtor’s counsel for the 2012 case.
Affairs Afloat, Inc. voluntarily filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy relief on October 15th, 2013. The petition was filed in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. The case has been assigned to the Honorable Judge Burton R. Lifland, under case number 1:13-bk-13356. (Click case number for docket summary.)
The debtor is a river cruise operator that operates in New York City out of Pier 78 on West 38th Street. Affairs Afloat, Inc. was established in 1988 and provides services through its two river cruise ships, The Queen of Hearts (pictured right) and The Star of Palm Beach. The Queen of Hearts is a three level ship that is Coast Guard certified for 450 guests plus staff and crew. The Star of Palm Beach is a two level ship and is Coast Guard certified for 380 guests plus staff and crew.
Affairs Afloat hosts various cruises on specified dates in addition to its weekly cruises such as its Shadow Nightclub on Tuesday nights, Cruise Brasil on Wednesday nights, Candela Cruise on Thursday nights. Debtor also holds a Kiddie Cruise on Sunday afternoons. Debtor offers group packages for many of its events and its services are also available for private events. For more information about debtor’s programs and services please visit their website here.
Debtor claimed assets and liabilities of between $1 and $10 million with HSBC Bank, the Internal Revenue Service, the Security Exchange Commission. It appears that the Chapter 11 filing has not affected debtor’s operations as it is accepting reservations for cruises for Halloween and New Year’s Eve. Affairs Afloat, Inc. is represented by Jonathan S. Pasternak of DelBello Donnellan Weingarten Wise & Wiederkehr, LLP.
In the beginning of 2014, I was asked by the WV Attorney General’s office to participate in a town hall meeting to discuss issues impacting the WV economy. As a business and bankruptcy lawyer, I wanted to do my diligence. I asked my clients and colleagues what they believed were significant factors. Here was a punch list of the issues identified by them and those at the town hall meeting:
- retention and attraction of young talent
- scarcity of livable downtown spaces in major WV cities, Weirton, Wheeling, Huntington, Charleston, Martinsburg, Morgantown
- healthcare reform proving costly for new businesses
- business and Occupancy taxes
- rampant drug addiction
- revitalization of old industry to attract new industry.
- deterioration of main streets
- oil and gas industry presence.
Prior to the town hall meeting, I also asked Justin Saporito, my law clerk to take to google to research this topic.
Justin found a 2014 Outlook Report (Report) for WV’s economy, produced by West Virginia University’s College of Business and Economics (one of my alma maters).
The economy of West Virginia has grown steadily over the past year with Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growing by 3.3% over the past year, ranking it tenth (10th) among U.S. states in real GDP growth. This growth was the result of several factors such as the addition of 3,000 new jobs over the past year, a state unemployment rate that has remained 1% below the national average for the past five years, and increased exports. Exports accounted for 16% of state economic output in 2012 compared with only 5% in 2000. The housing and automotive sectors of the economy, important indicators of economic health, have also seen increases. Home sales in WV are on par with home sales during the 2004-2005 housing boom and auto sales are at pre-recession levels.
According to the report, the key drivers of the economy in 2012 were coal mining, natural gas, healthcare, tourism, electrical power manufacturing, and chemical manufacturing. The Report predicted that annual job growth would increase in the healthcare services, wholesale and retail trade, construction, and professional and business service sectors every year through 2017.
A shining light for WV’s economy has been the city of Morgantown. Morgantown boasts an unemployment rate that is 3% below the national average with job growth above the national average with an estimated annual job growth rate of 2% in the coming years.
It is not all good news for WV however as it is ranked 47th among the 50 states in per capita income. Another major concern is the declining and aging population. WV’s median age is 5 years above the national average. Another concern is the state budget, ¼ of which comes from coal tax revenue and lottery revenue. With coal production predicted to fall through 2017, the state will have to find additional sources of revenue in the coming years. Despite these looming issues, WV is expected to have revenue growth of 3.5% for 2014.
DragonFire, Inc. filed a voluntary petition for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in October 25th, 2013. The petition was filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania and has been assigned case number 2:13-bk-24517. Debtor’s Disclosure Statement, Balance Sheet, Declaration of Schedules, and other documents were due by November 8th, 2013. For a complete list of the documents due please refer to the document summary.
Debtor is the corporate entity for DragonFire Japanese Steakhouse and Sushi Bar located at 1500 Washington Rd. in the Gallery Mall in Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania. As the name suggests, DragonFire specializes in hibachi and sushi. For those unfamiliar with hibachi, it is a rectangular Japanese style barbecue grill. Customers often sit at a counter that spans three sides of the grill. The chef stands at the fourth side and prepares the meal (which typically consists of fried rice, vegetables, and various meats) with much fanfare. DragonFire also boasts a robata grill, a traditional Japanese slow grilling method. For more information about DragonFire, you can visit their website here.
Debtor has declared between $50k and $100k in assets with between $500k and $1 million in liabilities with approximately 20 creditors listed in the petition. Debtor is represented by Donald R. Calaiaro of Calaiaro & Corbett, P.C.
The entities in charge of the 1818 Market Street location for the Marathon Grill Philadelphia restaurant chain, 1818 Market Street Marathon Grill, Inc. and its general partner 1818 Market Street Marathon Grill Associates , filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) on October 9, 2013. 1818 Market Street Marathon Grill, Inc. is the corporate entity for the 1818 Market Street location and has been assigned to the Honorable Judge Magdeline D. Coleman under case number 2:13-bk-18861. 1818 Market Street Marathon Grill Associates, the partnership in charge of the location filed separately and has been assigned to the Honorable Judge Eric L. Frank under case number 2:13-bk-18863. (Please click the hyperlinks for docket summaries). Motions for Joint Administration of both cases were filed by each entity on October 9, 2013. The debtors listed the same creditors with the exception that 1818 Market Street Marathon Grill, Inc. also lists NNN 1818 Market, LLC, the building management company in charge of 1818 Market St.
The Marathon Grill began as a 10-seat hamburger restaurant in Northeast Philadelphia in 1984. It eventually grew into a six location restaurant chain before shrinking back down to operating three locations at 1818 Market St., 19th & Spruce St., and 16th & Sansom St. The bankruptcies affect the 1818 Market St. location, the largest of the three restaurants. The filings were made in response to learning that the landlord intended to take possession of the restaurant space over an ongoing dispute over unpaid back rent and fees of approximately $540,000.
1818 Market Street Marathon Grill Associates declared assets between $500,000 and $1 million with liabilities between $100,000 and $500,000. 1818 Market Street Marathon Grill, Inc. declared assets between $50,000 and $100,000 with liabilities between $1 and $10 million. The debtors entities are represented by Aris J. Karalis and Robert W. Seitzer of Maschmeyer Karalis P.C. The bankruptcies do not affect the other Marathon Grill locations and the debtors have pledged that the 1818 Market St. location will remain open during the bankruptcy proceedings.
Salene: In my younger years as a lawyer at Weir & Partners LLP in Philadelphia (2002-2004), I used to grab many late dinners at the Marathon Grill location at Sansom Street. It was hip, for sure. What is the formula for sustainability in the restaurant industry?
On September 3, 2013 Fairmont General Hospital, Inc. of Fairmont, WV and affiliate company Fairmont Physicians, Inc. (“debtors”) filed voluntary petitions for bankruptcy relief under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code with Fairmont General Hospital, Inc. as the lead debtor. The petitions were filed with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of West Virginia with the assigned case numbers 1:13-bk-01054 and 1:13-bk-01055 respectively. The cases were assigned to the Honorable Judge Patrick M. Flatley (who is originally from Salene’s hometown of Weirton by the way) and consolidated (by debtors’ request) under case number 1:13-bk-01054.
The Debtors’ Chapter 11 Plan and Disclosure Statement are due by January 2, 2014. Schedules A-J were originally due on September 17, 2013 as were a Statement of Financial Affairs, Statement of Operations, Federal Income Tax Return, and other filings. (Please see the docket summary for a complete list of due filings.) At the time of filing, the debtors made multiple motions including motions to extend the time before the required Schedules and other would become due, maintain existing financial institutions and practices, pay pre-filing debts and obligations, and maintain utility services. All of these motions were granted. For a complete breakdown of the case please refer to the docket summary. The Meeting of Creditors has been set for Thursday, October 31, 2013 at 10:00 AM.
Fairmont General Hospital (FGH) is a private, non-profit, community hospital that was originally founded in 1939. FGH offers a variety of health services including surgical, rehabilitation, mental health, wellness/testing, emergency services, and more. For a complete list of the services they offer please click here.
The debtors claim assets and liabilities between $10 and $50 million. Notably, the debtors are currently seeking a strategic partner to take over its facility. The debtors are represented by Rayford K. Adams, III of Spilman, Thomas, & Battle, PLLC. Spilman, Thomas, & Battle, PLLC has seven offices spread across West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and North Carolina with three of their offices located in West Virginia.