Haskell v. Goldman, Sachs & Co. (In re Genesis Health Ventures, Inc.) (Genesis II)

355 B.R. 438 (2006)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Haskell v. Goldman, Sachs & Co. (In re Genesis Health Ventures, Inc.) (Genesis II)

United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware
355 B.R. 438 (2006)

Facts

Genesis Health Ventures, Inc. (Genesis) (debtor) filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization plan in 2001. The plan was confirmed in 2001. In 2004, 275 of Genesis’s investors (subordinated investors) (creditors), who held about $205 million in debentures issued by Genesis, sued Genesis and Goldman, Sachs & Company (Goldman) (creditor), alleging fraud. The debentures had been subordinated to roughly $1.3 billion in senior debt. Goldman held about half the senior debt. The subordinated investors alleged that Goldman and two other firms (collectively, senior lenders) had paid Genesis’s management to understate the figures upon which Genesis’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) were based. The understated EBITDA was used to depress calculation of Genesis’s enterprise value. The subordinated investors asserted that if Genesis’s value had been calculated accurately, the subordinated investors would have received the full value of their notes. The subordinated investors sought $200 million in monetary damages from Genesis and the senior lenders. Under United States Bankruptcy Code § 1144, a party could ask a court to revoke confirmation of a reorganization plan for fraud provided the request was made within six months of confirmation. The subordinated investors asserted that it had been impossible to discover the fraud sooner. The bankruptcy court first held that the claims against Genesis were time-barred. The court also held that the claims against the senior lenders were barred. On appeal, the court’s ruling that the claims against Genesis were barred was upheld, but the ruling that the claims against the senior lenders were barred was reversed, and the issue was remanded to the bankruptcy court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Walsh, 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 811,000 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 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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 811,000 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
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 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