Concord Real Estate CDO 2006-1, Ltd. v. Bank of America N.A.

996 A.2d 324 (2010)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Concord Real Estate CDO 2006-1, Ltd. v. Bank of America N.A.

Delaware Court of Chancery
996 A.2d 324 (2010)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

Concord Real Estate CDO 2006-1, Ltd., and Concord Real Estate CDO 2006-1, LLX (collectively, Concord) (plaintiffs) issued several classes of notes under an indenture. The classes of notes had different priority levels. The notes with higher priorities in principal and interest payments paid the noteholders a lower rate of interest. The Concord Debt Funding Trust (the trust), which was related to Concord, held several classes of the notes issued by Concord. Concord became worried that it would be unable to cover certain classes of the notes, which would result in Concord failing a coverage test. In response, the trust surrendered its notes (the subject notes), which had a principal amount over $66 million, back to Concord at no charge. Concord delivered the subject notes to Bank of America, N.A. (defendant), the indenture trustee and notes registrar, for cancellation, but Bank of America refused to cancel the notes. If the subject notes were not canceled, Concord would fail the coverage test and owe other noteholders over $900,000 in redemption payments. If the subject notes were canceled, Concord would not fail the coverage test and would not owe any redemption payments. Bank of America reasoned that the cancellation was not allowed under the indenture. The indenture did not include any provision about the voluntary surrender and cancellation of a note by the noteholder. Bank of America also argued that the cancellation would go against the reasonable expectations of senior noteholders, who expected to receive redemption payments in the event of a coverage failure. Concord filed a lawsuit in Delaware state court against Bank of America, arguing that it had properly delivered the subject notes for cancellation.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Laster, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership