Attorney Jack Haake penned an article, “In Tronox, 2nd Circ. Sends Clear Message About Injunctions,” analyzing what the In re Tronox Inc., No. 16-343, (2d Cir. Apr. 20, 2017) decision means for entities that don’t agree with how the court is evaluating their bankruptcy injunctions.
Haake’s article thoroughly examines the decision and explains that, per the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s decision, “entities dissatisfied with a district court’s interpretation of an injunction must choose either to comply with the injunction as interpreted by the district court or risk sanctions if they believe the district court erred.”
Haake’s article thoroughly examines the decision and explains that, per the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s decision, “entities dissatisfied with a district court’s interpretation of an injunction must choose either to comply with the injunction as interpreted by the district court or risk sanctions if they believe the district court erred.”
Related Insights
31 December 2024
Foley Viewpoints
SEC Enforcement Action Against Church & Dwight Director: Lessons for Outside Directors
The SEC’s settlement with James R. Craigie, former CEO, chairman, and director of Church & Dwight Co. Inc., for violating proxy disclosure rules by standing for election as an independent director without disclosing his close personal friendship with a senior Church & Dwight executive has caused consternation in the legal community regarding when a friendship jeopardizes director independence under stock exchange rules.
31 December 2024
Manufacturing Industry Advisor
The State of the Law of Requirements Contracts
Amid increasing pressure on supply chains across the globe, multiple recent court opinions have disrupted the law of requirements contracts.
30 December 2024
Foley Viewpoints
Controlling Entities to Dealer Contracts Subject to Puerto Rico’s Law 75 May Be Liable for Tortious Interference
Plaintiffs asserting claims for tortious interference of contracts covered by Puerto Rico’s Dealer’s Contracts Act, commonly known as Law 75, may automatically satisfy one element of such a claim. Law 75 regulates relationships between distributors and manufacturers.