Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 JANUARY 2017

Second Circuit Reverses Marblegate Decision

Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Seyfarth Shaw LLP
Contributor
Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Our high-caliber legal representation and advanced delivery capabilities allow us to take on our...

View firm profile
Explore more from Seyfarth Shaw LLP

EDMC negotiated certain changes to the terms of the Secured Debt in September 2014 and, in return, EDMC agreed to guarantee repayment of the Secured Debt (the "Secured Guarantee").

United StatesInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring

Trust Indenture Act Section 316(b) Limited to Actual Amendments to An Indenture's Core Terms

Seyfarth Synopsis: On January 17, 2017, in a 2-1 decision in Marblegate Asset Management, LLC v. Education Management Finance Corp., (15-2124) (the "Decision"), the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (the "Second Circuit") held that "Section 316(b) [of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939] prohibits only non-consensual amendments to an indenture's core payment terms," Decision at 4, reversing the decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the "District Court"), Marblegate Asset Management, LLC v. Education Management Corp., 111 F. Supp.3d 542 (S.D.N.Y. 2015), which held that a series of transactions meant to restructure the debt of Education Management Corporation ("EDMC") outside of bankruptcy over the objections of certain unsecured noteholders violated Section 316(b) of the Trust Indenture Act of 1939 ("TIA"), 15 U.S.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from