United States: Seventh Circuit Holds Section 105(a) Permits Stay Of Litigation Against Non-Debtor Affiliates

Section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a bankruptcy court "may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title." 11 U.S.C. § 105(a). In the Caesars bankruptcy, the Seventh Circuit explored the breadth of a court's rights to take action under this section. The Seventh Circuit held that section 105(a) permits the Bankruptcy Court to issue an injunction with respect to litigation pending against the debtors' non-debtor parent. The Court of Appeals did not ultimately determine whether the stay should in fact be granted because "that's an issue for the bankruptcy judge to resolve in the first instance;" rather, it held that the Bankruptcy Court and District Court had erred in interpreting section 105(a) too narrowly in denying the stay sought by the debtors. In re Caesars Entm't Operating Co., Inc., No. 15-3259, 2015 WL 9311432 (7th Cir. Dec. 23, 2015).


The case stemmed from events surrounding Caesars Entertainment Operating Company (CEOC), a casino company. Beginning in the mid-2000s and continuing in recent years, CEOC borrowed billions of dollars to finance its operations. In doing so, it issued notes to lenders that were guaranteed by Caesars Entertainment Corporation (CEC), its parent and principal owner. As CEOC's financial position grew increasingly precarious, CEC attempted to eliminate its guaranty obligations by selling assets of CEOC to other parties and terminating the guarantees that it had issued. CEOC's creditors sued CEC, claiming that it was a violation of federal law to abandon the guarantees without unanimous bondholder approval. About five months later, CEOC filed for bankruptcy under chapter 11. In its bankruptcy proceedings, CEOC asserted claims against CEC, alleging that CEC had engaged in a fraudulent transfer by causing CEOC to transfer highly valuable assets to CEC at less than fair value, subsequently saddling CEOC with billions of dollars' worth of debt.

Citing concerns that CEC's guarantors would "thwart[] [CEOC's] multi-billion-dollar restructuring effort, which depends on a substantial contribution from CEC in settlement of [CEOC's] claims against it, and thus . . . jump the line in front of other creditors, including more senior ones. . .", CEOC asked the bankruptcy judge to temporarily enjoin the guaranty suits pursuant to section 105(a).

The bankruptcy judge refused to issue the injunction, reasoning that, while section 105(a) gives judges the right to enjoin litigation against non-debtor parties, he could only do so if the litigation arises out of the "same acts" that gave rise to disputes in the debtor's bankruptcy proceeding. Because the disputes in CEOC's bankruptcy arose out of CEC's alleged fraudulent transfers whereas the disputes in the guarantors' lawsuits arose from CEC's alleged repudiation of the guarantees, the bankruptcy judge believed he lacked the authority to issue the requested injunction. The district judge affirmed.


The Seventh Circuit disagreed. Judge Richard Posner, writing for a three-judge panel, described the potential breadth of section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code:

[N]othing in 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) authorizes the limitation on the powers of a bankruptcy judge that CEC's creditors . . . successfully urged on the judges below. . . . Though section 105(a) does not give the bankruptcy court carte blanche ... it grants the extensive equitable powers that bankruptcy courts need in order to be able to perform their statutory duties. . . . [The proper question] is whether the injunction sought by CEOC is likely to enhance the prospects for a successful resolution of the disputes attending to its bankruptcy. If it is, and its denial will thus endanger the success of the bankruptcy proceedings, the grant of the injunction would, in the language of section 105(a), be 'appropriate to carry out the provisions' of the Bankruptcy Code, since successful resolution of disputes arising in bankruptcy proceedings is one of the Code's central objectives.

The Seventh Circuit pointed out that CEOC's creditors have a direct and substantial interest in CEC's guaranty litigation, because the less capital CEC has for CEOC to recapture through prosecution or settlement of its fraudulent transfer claims, the less money CEOC's creditors will receive in the bankruptcy proceeding. The court held that "there is nothing in section 105(a) to bar the order sought by CEOC; for the statute . . . authorizes 'any order . . . that is . . . appropriate to carry out the provisions of' the Bankruptcy Code." In vacating the decision below and remanding for further proceedings, the Seventh Circuit concluded that whether or not the temporary injunction is an "appropriate" order is a factual issue to be resolved by the bankruptcy judge in the first instance.

The Seventh Circuit also addressed two cases cited by the guaranty plaintiffs in support of the "same acts" limitation on section 105(a) endorsed by the lower courts.

First, the plaintiffs pointed to Fisher v. Apostolou, 155 F.3d 876 (7th Cir. 1998). In Fisher, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's injunction under section 105(a), stating that "while the [investor] Plaintiffs' claims [were] not 'property of' the estate [and so were not subject to an automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362], it is difficult to imagine how those claims could be more closely 'related to' it [under 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b)]." Id. at 882. While Fisher was a more "clear-cut" case, the court in Caesars held that "it doesn't follow that a less clear-cut case is necessarily beyond the reach of section 105(a). In both Fisher and [Caesars] the issuance of a temporary injunction against a class of creditors could well facilitate a prompt and orderly wind-up of the bankruptcy."

The plaintiffs also cited In re Teknek, LLC, 563 F.3d 639 (7th Cir. 2009) for support. In Teknek, the court refused to issue an injunction under section 105(a) because the claims against the non-debtor were not sufficiently related to the debtor's bankruptcy. It noted that "alter egos [had] looted both [the bankrupt company] and [the non-bankrupt company][,] ... [which were] separate acts, which caused separate injuries to two separate companies, only one of which [was] in bankruptcy." Id. at 649 (emphasis added).

The Caesars court distinguished Teknek, noting that the litigation regarding CEC's guarantees directly harms CEOC, the debtor, and "concerns transactions that are closely related to, and sometimes overlapping with, those challenged in [CEOC's] bankruptcy." Because the potential injuries to CEOC's creditors and to the guaranty plaintiffs both stem from CEC's broad scheme to transfer CEOC's assets to itself, the Teknek rationale is inapplicable to the present case.

The breadth of section 105 has long been interpreted broadly. However this ruling clearly positions the Seventh Circuit as a court that interprets section 105 even more broadly to protect debtors in chapter 11. The factual scenario in Caesars, i.e. a parent company guaranteeing the obligations of its subsidiary, is very common. Given the Seventh Circuit's decision, a bankrupt subsidiary with any claims against its parent—no matter how unrelated to the subsidiary's bankruptcy—could threaten its creditors' ability to collect on their guarantees.

Five days after the Seventh Circuit issued its decision, CEOC filed an application to set a hearing on an emergency motion for a new ruling on the stay. Judge A. Benjamin Goldgar of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied that request without prejudice the very same day. Citing the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Judge Goldgar issued a one-page order which noted that the Seventh Circuit had not yet issued its mandate for a ruling on remand, and that it was not required to do so until at least January 19, 2016. Accordingly, Judge Goldgar concluded that the Bankruptcy Court lacks jurisdiction to address the issue on remand until the mandate issues and is docketed. CEOC subsequently filed a motion for expedited issuance of the mandate, but the Seventh Circuit denied it. We do expect further litigation later this month as the matter makes its way back to the Bankruptcy Court. Whether Judge Goldgar will find that the stay is in fact necessary or appropriate remains to be seen.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Events from this Firm
26 Sep 2018, Seminar, Tokyo, Japan

Orrick’s Global Japan Practice is hosting a series of “Orrick Library” seminars to explore legal issues in various fields in Japan as well as the United States, Asia and Europe

26 Sep 2018, Conference, New York, United States

Employment Partner, Mandy Perry and Chair of Orrick's Global Employment Law Practice, Mike Delikat will be participating in the Global Business Protections 2018: International Restrictive Covenants and Confidential Information Conference.

10 Oct 2018, Conference, Florida, United States
Julie Totten is Program Chair of this year’s conference, Lynne Hermle is speaking on women in the courtroom, boardroom, and c-suite, and Erin Connell is speaking on pay equity and pay transparency.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Jones Day
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Jones Day
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions