United States: Not So Safe After All?

United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware Holds That Litigation Trustee May Pursue State Law Fraudulent Conveyance Claims, Notwithstanding Bankruptcy Code Safe Harbors

On June 20, 2016, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Bankruptcy Court") denied in part a motion to dismiss and allowed state law constructive fraudulent transfer claims to proceed, despite the fact that such claims likely would have been precluded by the Bankruptcy Code's safe harbors if brought pursuant to federal law. This decision is notable in that it is at odds with a recent decision by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Tribune,1 which held that state law constructive fraudulent conveyance claims brought by creditors are barred by the Bankruptcy Code's safe harbors.


In 2007, private equity fund Water Street Healthcare Partners, L.P. ("Water Street") acquired Physiotherapy Holdings, Inc. (the "Debtor") for roughly $150 million. Shortly after the transaction closed, Water Street entered into an agreement to merge the Debtor with Benchmark Medical, Inc. Water Street owned 45% of the common stock of the surviving entity, while private equity fund Wind Point Partners IV, L.P. (together with Water Street, the "Defendants") held a 35% ownership stake. Throughout the next five years, the Defendants increased their ownership to approximately 90% of the Debtor's common shares.

The litigation trustee (the "Trustee")2 alleges that during this time, the Defendants engaged in various forms of accounting fraud in order to overstate the Debtor's financial health and reap a substantial profit from the sale of their shares. By 2009, the Debtor's financial condition had deteriorated significantly, and, according to the Trustee, the Defendants began implementing new strategies to sell the company and maximize the potential sale consideration, including pressuring the Debtor's senior management into manipulating net revenue and patient visit counts to make the Debtor seem more profitable.3

The winning bidder was private equity firm Court Square, with a cash offer of $510 million. Court Square created a subsidiary to merge into the Debtor, leaving the Debtor as the surviving entity. The subsidiary financed the transaction by issuing, among other things, $210 million in Secured Notes. According to the Trustee, the Secured Notes were marketed with an offering memorandum that falsely represented the Debtor's pre-tax net income and unadjusted EBITDA. Under the terms of the deal, the Debtor assumed the debt, and the Defendants received $248.6 million in exchange for their shares. Shortly after the transaction closed, the Debtor's new owner retained an accounting firm which determined that the Debtor's income had been overstated for the years 2010 and 2012. On April 2, 2014, the Debtor defaulted on the Secured Notes, and on November 12, 2013, the Debtor commenced a case under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code.

The Trustee alleged that (i) the Defendants knew that their shares were grossly overvalued and (ii) the financial deterioration of the new company was inevitable once its new management uncovered the fraud. The Trustee filed an eight-count Complaint, which included intentional fraudulent transfer claims and federal and state law constructive fraudulent transfer claims, seeking to avoid the payments made to the Defendants for their equity in the Debtor. The Defendants argued, among other things, that the payments could not be avoided as constructive fraudulent transfers due to the applicability of the Bankruptcy Code's safe harbors, in particular section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code.4


The Bankruptcy Court spent the majority of its opinion considering whether section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code preempts state fraudulent transfer law with respect to the claims being asserted by the Trustee, considering three separate arguments advanced by the Trustee.

Preemption of Individual Creditor Claims

First, the Trustee argued that because section 546(e) only bars avoidance actions by an estate representative— and not a litigation trustee—the litigation trust may assert claims under state fraudulent transfer law, so long as such claims were assigned by creditors. The Defendants argued that section 546(e) preempts state fraudulent transfer law with respect to such claims.

The Bankruptcy Court agreed with the Trustee. In adopting the reasoning of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York in Lyondell,5 the Bankruptcy Court noted that the plain language of section 546(e) only limits a trustee's ability to bring a fraudulent conveyance action; the statute is silent, however, with respect to a creditor's ability to bring such a claim. In contrast, Congress explicitly has stated in other Bankruptcy Code sections when it intends for a provision to apply to entities other than the trustee. Moreover, section 546(e) does not incorporate a phrase such as "notwithstanding any applicable law," which appears in other Code sections in order to expressly preempt state law.

Turning to the legislative history, the Bankruptcy Court noted that the purpose of the safe harbors is to mitigate the potential systemic risk of certain complex financial transactions. Under these facts, however, allowing the Trustee to pursue its state fraudulent transfer claims would not have a destabilizing effect on the financial markets Congress sought to protect through the safe harbors.

The Trustee is not seeking to avoid a large portfolio of swaps, nor are any public shares involved. Instead, the Bankruptcy Court found that requiring two private equity funds (who owned over 90% of the Debtor's common stock) to disgorge their payments would hardly pose any sort of "ripple effect" to the broader secondary market. The Bankruptcy Court also agreed with the Lyondell bankruptcy court that the states traditionally have occupied the field of fraudulent transfer law, such that applying the presumption against federal preemption of state laws (absent clear Congressional intent to the contrary) is appropriate. Finally, the Bankruptcy Court noted that the Defendants were alleged to have acted in bad faith, stating that "[p]ermitting a defendant to evade liability in this scenario vis-ŕ-vis the safe harbor would run counter to Congress' policy of providing remedies for creditors who have been defrauded by corporate insiders."

The Trustee also argued that because the Defendants' shares were converted into certificates prior to the merger's closing, the payments to selling shareholders were not "settlement payments" in connection with a "securities contract." The Bankruptcy Court disagreed. First, section 546(e) provides that the settlement payment must be made in connection with a securities contract, which standard was met here. Moreover, the Third Circuit previously has held that the definition of the term "settlement payment" was broad enough to encompass "the transfer of cash or securities made to complete a securities transaction."6 As a result, the fact that the Defendants' shares were converted into certificates does not overcome the broad scope of section 546(e).

Based on the foregoing, the Bankruptcy Court held that a litigation trustee may assert state law fraudulent transfer claims in the capacity of creditor-assignee, when the transaction sought to be avoided poses no threat of ripple effects in the securities markets; the transferees received payment for non-public securities; and the transferees were corporate insiders that allegedly acted in bad faith.7

Remaining Arguments

The Defendants argued that because the Secured Noteholders were aware that the proceeds from the issuance would be used to cash out the selling shareholders, the noteholders ratified the fraudulent transfer when they purchased their securities and so are estopped from seeking to avoid the transfer. The Trustee argued that the Secured Noteholders could not have ratified the transaction, because they purchased the notes in reliance on fraudulent financial statements. The Bankruptcy Court found that the Trustee advanced sufficient allegations that the Secured Noteholders were misled into lending money to a company whose financial health was poorer than represented, and that based on these allegations it could not be concluded that the Secured Noteholders ratified the sale of the Debtor.8

The Defendants also argued that a release entered into by Court Square and the Defendants, eight months after the sale, prohibits the Trustee from asserting certain counts of the Complaint. In response, the Trustee argued that because avoidance actions are not derivative of a debtor's prepetition legal interests,9 the release is unenforceable with respect to the Trustee's claims. The Bankruptcy Court held that because the Trustee is not a party to the release, he is not bound by the terms of the agreement.

Finally, the Bankruptcy Court held that the Trustee alleged more than the requisite number of "badges of fraud" to overcome Defendants' motion to dismiss with respect to the Trustee's actual fraudulent transfer claims. Specifically, the transferees were classic insiders of the Debtor, as they owned 90% of the Debtor's common stock; the complaint clearly alleged numerous accounting inaccuracies that could lead a reasonable finder of fact to conclude that the Debtor's shares were grossly overvalued; and there was a supportable inference that the Defendants intentionally manipulated the Debtor's earnings in order to maximize the proceeds for their shares.


Courts in New York have reached differing conclusions with respect to the applicability of the section 546(e) safe harbor to preempt state law fraudulent transfer claims, though cases in New York that held such claims could proceed are no longer good law in the Second Circuit based on the Second Circuit's recent decision in Tribune.10 Here, the Bankruptcy Court relied heavily on the legislative history and Congressional intent with respect to section 546(e) in disagreeing with the policy concerns raised by the Second Circuit in Tribune (namely, that the safe harbors were enacted to promote finality for individual investors). Instead, the Bankruptcy Court argued that such cases have placed too much emphasis on certain themes that do not appear to have played a critical role in the drafting of the safe harbors, as opposed to focusing on the purpose of the safe harbors, which, according to the Bankruptcy Court, is to mitigate the potential systemic risk of certain complex financial transactions.

Despite its disagreement with the Second Circuit in Tribune, the Bankruptcy Court's holding is somewhat limited: a litigation trustee may assert state law fraudulent transfer claims in the capacity of creditor-assignee when avoidance would not threaten a ripple effect in the securities markets; the transferees received payment for non- public securities; and the transferees were corporate insiders that allegedly acted in bad faith. Though the holding certainly is notable, the limitations on its applicability may not make the safe harbor as unsafe as it might otherwise appear.


1 Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Ams. v. Large Private Beneficial Owners (In re Tribune Co. Fraudulent Conveyance Litig.), 818 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2016).

2 The Debtor established the PAH Litigation Trust through its plan of reorganization. Because the Secured Noteholders (defined below) assigned their individual claims to the Trustee, the Litigation Trust has standing to assert claims in the capacity of both an estate representative and an assignee.

3 Because the Defendants' representatives sat on the board, the Trustee asserted that Defendants were well aware of these accounting manipulations.

4 Section 546(e) provides, in pertinent part: "Notwithstanding [S]ections 544 ... [and] 548(a)(1)(B) ... the trustee may not avoid a transfer that is a ... settlement payment ... made by or to (or for the benefit of) a commodity broker, forward contract merchant, stockbroker, financial institution, financial participant, or securities clearing agency, or that is a transfer made by or to (or for the benefit of) a commodity broker, forward contract merchant, stockbroker, financial institution, financial participant, or securities clearing agency, in connection with a securities contract ... that is made before the commencement of the case, except under Section 548(a)(1)(a) of this title."

5 Weisfelner v. Fund 1 (In re Lyondell Chem. Co.), 503 B.R. 348 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2014). The Lyondell court held that section 546(e) does not apply to individual creditors asserting fraudulent transfer claims under state law.

6 Lowenschuss v. Resorts Int'l, Inc. (In re Resorts Int'l, Inc.), 181 F.3d 505, 515 (3d Cir. 1999).

7 Section 546(e) carves out an exception for intentional fraudulent transfers brought under section 548(a)(1)(A), but there is no such exception for constructive fraudulent transfer claims brought under section 548(a)(1)(B). The Trustee argued that the safe harbor did not apply to its claims because the transferees allegedly participated in the fraud, but the Bankruptcy Court held that, as the statute is currently written, there is no exception for insiders who allegedly acted in bad faith. Despite its holding, the Bankruptcy Court did note that where, as here, the Trustee alleges that the transferee actively participated in the fraud, the cases holding the safe harbor applicable to constructive fraudulent transfer claims— despite the debtor's involvement in the fraud—lose some persuasive value.

8 Ratification is the act of knowingly giving sanction or affirmance to an act which otherwise would be unauthorized and not binding. The central element of ratification is intent, which the Bankruptcy Court found may not have been present based on these facts.

9 Post-petition avoidance actions can only be brought by a trustee after a bankruptcy petition is filed, and the prepetition debtor does not own the right to pursue a fraudulent transfer claim in bankruptcy, nor can the prepetition debtor waive such claims.

10 See, e.g., Tribune, 818 F.3d 98; Lyondell, 503 B.R. at 348; Whyte v. Barclays Bank PLC, 494 B.R. 196 (S.D.N.Y. 2013).

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.

In association with
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
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). 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 & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd 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 or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.