ATexasBankruptcyLawyersBlog

Must Read Opinion on Preference Issues

02/25/14
Judge Tony Davis has authored an opinion which should be recommended reading for anyone litigating preference issues.   The opinion encompasses the court’s rulings on both summary judgment and trial on the merits and touches on both procedural and substantive issues.   Ciesla v. Harney Management Partners (In re KLN Steel Products Co.), No. 13-1013 (Bankr. W.D. Tex.
[more]

Must Read Opinion on Preference Issues

02/25/14
Judge Tony Davis has authored an opinion which should be recommended reading for anyone litigating preference issues.   The opinion encompasses the court’s rulings on both summary judgment and trial on the merits and touches on both procedural and substantive issues.   Ciesla v. Harney Management Partners (In re KLN Steel Products Co.), No. 13-1013 (Bankr. W.D. Tex.
[more]

Will the Fifth Circuit Clarify Pro-Snax?

02/14/14
For chapter 11 debtor's lawyers, Matter of Pro-Snax Distributors, Inc., 157 F.3d 414 (5th Cir. 1998) is like the sword of Damocles--constantly hanging over counsel's head and threatening to deny compensation when a case goes south.   While 11 U.S.C. Sec. 330(a)(3) makes results one of several factors to consider in awarding compensation, Pro-Snax makes "identifiable, tangible and material" results a pre-requisite to getting paid.    
[more]

Will the Fifth Circuit Clarify Pro-Snax?

02/14/14
For chapter 11 debtor's lawyers, Matter of Pro-Snax Distributors, Inc., 157 F.3d 414 (5th Cir. 1998) is like the sword of Damocles--constantly hanging over counsel's head and threatening to deny compensation when a case goes south.   While 11 U.S.C. Sec. 330(a)(3) makes results one of several factors to consider in awarding compensation, Pro-Snax makes "identifiable, tangible and material" results a pre-requisite to getting paid.    
[more]

Update on Possible Hacker Attack

01/28/14

After the PACER  and CM/ECF outage on Friday January 24, I asked the PACER service center if they had any comment.   They were kind enough to respond on January 27.   Here is the latest information: 

[more]

Update on Possible Hacker Attack

01/28/14

After the PACER  and CM/ECF outage on Friday January 24, I asked the PACER service center if they had any comment.   They were kind enough to respond on January 27.   Here is the latest information: 

[more]

Who Knocked Out PACER/ECF???

01/25/14
On Friday January 24, 2014, attorneys trying to access the federal courts' electronic records and filing systems were unable to get through for almost four hours.   While occasional local outages for maintenance or technical problems are not unknown, there is some reason to believe that the PACER and ECF systems for the entire federal court system were taken down by hackers.   This raises questions of who was behind the hack and why they targeted the federal court system.
[more]

Who Knocked Out PACER/ECF???

01/25/14
On Friday January 24, 2014, attorneys trying to access the federal courts' electronic records and filing systems were unable to get through for almost four hours.   While occasional local outages for maintenance or technical problems are not unknown, there is some reason to believe that the PACER and ECF systems for the entire federal court system were taken down by hackers.   This raises questions of who was behind the hack and why they targeted the federal court system.
[more]

9th Circuit Gives Some Protection to Both Bloggers and Trustees

01/23/14
The case of self-proclaimed "investigative blogger" Crystal Cox took another turn as the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded the case against her.   The decision gives greater First Amendment protection to bloggers than the stingy view taken by the District Court.   However, it also recognizes that trustees are not public figures entitled to less deferential review.   The case is Cox v. Obsidian Finance Group, No. 12-35238 (9th Cir.
[more]

9th Circuit Gives Some Protection to Both Bloggers and Trustees

01/23/14
The case of self-proclaimed "investigative blogger" Crystal Cox took another turn as the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded the case against her.   The decision gives greater First Amendment protection to bloggers than the stingy view taken by the District Court.   However, it also recognizes that trustees are not public figures entitled to less deferential review.   The case is Cox v. Obsidian Finance Group, No. 12-35238 (9th Cir.
[more]