U.S. Bank National Association v. Village At Lakeridge
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 5, 2018 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Decided
- March 5, 2018
- Term
- October Term 2017
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Kagan
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party lost
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2017 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321 , 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus U. S. BANK N. A., TRUSTEE, BY AND THROUGH CWCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC v. VILLAGE AT LAKERIDGE, LLC CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 15–1509. Argued October 31, 2017—Decided March 5, 2018 Respondent Lakeridge is a corporate entity with a single owner, MBP Equity Partners. When Lakeridge filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, it had a pair of substantial debts: It owed petitioner U. S. Bank over $10 million and MBP another $2.76 million. Lakeridge submitted a reorganization plan, proposing to impair the interests of both U. S. Bank and MBP. U. S. Bank refused the offer, thus blocking Lake- ridge’s option for reorganization through a fully consensual plan. See 11 U. S. C. §1129 (a)(8). Lakeridge then turned to the so-called “cramdown” plan option for imposing a plan impairing the interests of a non-consenting class of creditors. See §1129(b). Among the pre- requisites for judicial approval of…
Excerpt of a 45,466-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.