400 Northridge Road
Suite 515
Atlanta, Georgia 30350
Tel. 770-399-9100
1776 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Tel. 202-223-0646
Bankruptcy |
Practice Overview
Firm lawyers have extensive experience in handling both general bankruptcy matters and telecommunications-related issues under the Bankruptcy Code. The Firm routinely advises clients in a variety of bankruptcy related matters including purchase of regulated entities and assets out of bankruptcy, pursing creditor client claims in Bankruptcy court, and structuring protections for clients in dealings with distressed carriers and other entities.
Over the years, Firm lawyers have researched and developed a variety deal protections for enterprise, carrier and financial clients against counter-party bankruptcy risks in a variety of jurisdictions. Among these are (i) drafting pre-bankruptcy contract clauses without violating the Bankruptcy Codes ipso facto prohibition; (ii) use of letters of credit, security agreements and collateral guaranties and (iii) creation of bankruptcy remote special purpose entities.
Illustrative Bankruptcy Matters
- Firm partner Bob Butler successfully argued a major bankruptcy case on behalf of our client, ASM Capital, an institutional claims trader, before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.* The U.S. Supreme Court recently announced that it has declined to review the case.
- Structuring a broadband wireless joint venture using a special purpose entity, spectrum leases, and other investment protections.
- Representation of a major wireless carrier as creditors counsel in the Continental Promotions Group, Inc. Chapter 11 filing.
- Various representations of clients in purchases of regulated telecom entities and assets out of bankruptcy.
- Extensive participation In the WorldCom case.
Mr. Butler appeared at both the FCC and the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of more than a dozen telephone company creditors. He has also counseled numerous telecommunications companies and other clients in connection with bankruptcy reorganizations and the interplay of the Bankruptcy Code with FCC regulation and other laws governing regulated industries. These include utilities obligations under Section 366 of the Bankruptcy Code, and related compliance with overlapping regulatory and bankruptcy law requirements. Drawing on his WorldCom bankruptcy experience, Mr. Butler also litigated one of the first disputes over construction of the 2005 amendments to Section 366.
In the same case, Mr. Sapronov represented a major telecommunications company in purchasing all of WorldComs shared tenant operations out of bankruptcy including, among other matters, negotiation and arbitration of telecommunications claims purchases and circuit assignments. He further represented a major wireless carrier creditor in settlement negotiations over competing claims in the WorldCom estate.
The Firms bankruptcy practice is supported by Thomas E. Austin, Jr., Of Counsel. Mr. Austin represents lenders and other institutional clients in creditor representation in bankruptcy court. He assists Firm telecommunications clients in creditor representation, including bankruptcy court appearances, filings, and claims processing. Mr. Austin also represents creditors in real estate related matters, including property foreclosures and workouts.
Synopsis
In sum, the Firms general bankruptcy practice includes:
- Advising clients regarding sale and acquisition of distressed assets, including claims purchases;
- Representation of creditors with respect to executory contracts and creditor rights, resolution of claims, preference actions and other commercial disputes;
- Structuring pre-bankruptcy protections and other creditor rights in telecom debtor bankruptcies;
- Advising clients in crafting deal protections in transactions with distressed entities;
- Helping clients navigate the complexities of compliance with Bankruptcy code obligations and telecommunications regulatory requirements; and
- Appeals of complex legal issues and commercial matters arising out of bankruptcy courts.
* ASM Capital, LP v. Ames Dep't Stores, Inc. (In re Ames Dep't Stores, Inc.), 582 F.3d 422 (2d Cir. 2009), petition for cert. denied, U.S. Sup. Ct. No. 09-726 (Feb. 19, 2010). The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the case. For more information, click here.
The materials on the Sapronov & Associates, P.C. web site are intended to inform clients, friends and visitors to the site in a general way about our law firm and legal developments. These materials are not intended to be treated as legal advice and the reader is advised to consult with an attorney experienced in such areas of the law prior to taking any actions on issues discussed on this web site. Posting of these materials is not intended to create any attorney-client relationship with the reader, and there is not a guarantee that the information is correct, complete or up-to-date. We welcome your comments and inquiries. To the extent you are not presently a Sapronov & Associates client, please do not send us any information about your legal affairs until you have made direct contact with one of our attorneys. Once we have determined that we have no conflict in advising you, we will be happy to discuss possible representation.