LOG IN / REGISTER



Threaded Order Chronological Order

Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy
Posted by: TheHarveyBoy 03:38 pm EDT 07/20/23

Philip Boroff in Broadway Journal (not always a fully reliable source) has a fascinating article about Hal Luftig's fight with his main investor/partner Warren Trepp.
Link ‘KINKY’ SUITS: INSIDE HAL LUFTIG CO'S BANKRUPTCY COURT BATTLE
reply to this message


re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy
Posted by: ryhog 04:23 pm EDT 07/20/23
In reply to: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy - TheHarveyBoy 03:38 pm EDT 07/20/23

It is interesting but all of this unpleasantness does not really factor heavily into the pending legal decision(s).

On a side note, I have never found Mr. Boroff less than fully reliable. Indeed, compared to many other sources, I would rate him pretty high on the totem pole.
reply to this message


re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy
Posted by: NoPeopleLike 04:36 pm EDT 07/20/23
In reply to: re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy - ryhog 04:23 pm EDT 07/20/23

Then what does factor into the pending legal decision?
reply to this message | reply to first message


re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy
Posted by: ryhog 04:55 pm EDT 07/20/23
In reply to: re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy - NoPeopleLike 04:36 pm EDT 07/20/23

The bankruptcy law, pursuant to which the bankruptcy court will adjudicate the case before it.
reply to this message | reply to first message


re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy
Posted by: NoPeopleLike 05:06 pm EDT 07/20/23
In reply to: re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy - ryhog 04:55 pm EDT 07/20/23

The underlying facts are quite relevant, which is why emails and other evidence were admitted.
reply to this message | reply to first message


re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy
Posted by: ryhog 06:36 pm EDT 07/20/23
In reply to: re: Hal Luftig possible bankruptcy - NoPeopleLike 05:06 pm EDT 07/20/23

I was referring to the histrionics. :-)

I am not familiar with any of the facts beyond what I've read at the link, but with that caveat (and my observation that this is getting well beyond this board's focus), it would appear that that evidence would only be relevant to a "piercing the corporate veil" argument that Mr. Trepp has presumably made. Otherwise, "releasing" Mr. Luftig would not be before the court. Piercing is a state law concept, not a bankruptcy concept, but the bankruptcy court can and does adjudicate that claim when it is (properly) raised. To my knowledge, piercing would require a proof of fraud (or maybe something close to it) and I am not sure I see that here (but again, I am only as good as what I read). Maybe this gets closer to answering your original question which was broader than my original mindset when I read it. I hope so.
reply to this message | reply to first message


Privacy Policy


Time to render: 0.028390 seconds.