Challenging Midstream Contracts in the Wake of 'Sabine'

, New York Law Journal

   | 0 Comments

Kathryn A. Coleman and Anson B. Frelinghuysen of Hughes Hubbard & Reed write: 'Sabine' set the stage for several heated battles over a debtor's ability to reject midstream contracts, and, in the process, introduced concern regarding midstream companies' cash flows. These conflicts arise at the intersection of the core bankruptcy tool of contract rejection, centuries-old state property law, and how the financing that supported the recent expansion of domestic oil and gas production was structured. The authors discuss the details of these conflicts and how the parties have achieved either resolution or the ability to move on despite the continuing lack of definitive answers in every case.

This premium content is reserved for New York Law Journal subscribers.

Continue reading by getting started with a subscription.

Already a subscriber? Log in now

Originally appeared in print as Bankruptcy Wildcatting: Challenging Midstream Contracts in the Wake of 'Sabine'

What's being said

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

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202773602700

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.