In Re Journal Register Co.

407 B.R. 520 (2009)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In Re Journal Register Co.

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York
407 B.R. 520 (2009)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

National media giant the Journal Register Company and its subsidiaries (the Journal) (debtors) owned and operated newspapers, other publications, websites, and printing facilities. The Journal sustained losses because of industry-wide decline in readership, increased internet competition, recession, and weak advertising demand. As its debt reached $695 million, the Journal entered a forbearance agreement with creditors that required retaining a restructuring advisor and proposing a five-year comprehensive restructuring plan. The Journal retained Robert Conway as chief restructuring advisor, developed a five-year plan, and filed for reorganization under Chapter 11. The five-year plan provided the basis for an agreement among a supermajority of secured lenders that supported a proposed reorganization plan. The secured creditors agreed to a “gift” of part of their proceeds to trade creditors in Class 4, which contained all the general unsecured creditors. An estimated $6.6 million would be distributed only to trade creditors who did not object to the plan and released claims against the Journal or its lenders. The disclosure statement explained that releases were essential to the lenders making the gift. Conway testified that the gift was critical to the Journal’s future and its business plan because it would ensure goodwill and survival of financially distressed trade creditors essential to the Journal’s daily operations and long-term survival. The gift would be placed in a trade account that would not constitute Journal property and undistributed amounts returned to the lenders. The secured and unsecured creditors voted overwhelmingly to approve the plan, but five creditors objected. Central States lodged the principal objection, arguing the plan discriminated unfairly among Class 4 unsecured creditors.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Gropper, 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 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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 832,000 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
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 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