In Re: Barquet Group and Ramis Barquet


New York Law Journal


Judge Jesse Furman

In 2004 art seller Barquet Group obtained secured financing from ACG Credit. It granted ACG Credit a continuing security interest in certain works comprising "collateral." ACG Credit later assigned its interests in Barquet's 2004 note to ACG Finance. The ACG parties' later dispute with SageCrest was settled by assignment of Barquet's obligations under the 2004 note to SageCrest. After Barquet sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy Credit and Finance filed a $3 million claim (Claim 43). They did not receive Barquet's Jan. 12, 2012, claim objection, nor learned of a Feb. 15, bankruptcy court order expunging their claim until May 2012. They appealed bankruptcy court's Aug. 22, order which refused reconsideration of claim 43's denial, and found claim 43 an impermissible attempt to disguise a new claim in the form of an amendment. District court affirmed. Bankruptcy court correctly held the ACG parties lacked a defense to Barquet's objection to claim 43 claim given that under their settlement with SageCrest they assigned all of their claims against Barquet—and ACG Finance's lien—to SageCrest. Further claim 43's purported failed to satisfy either prong of the Second Circuit's two-part test in Midland Cogeneration Venture LP v. Enron Corp.

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article# 1202582362997

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.