Photo of Frederick (Rick) Hyman

Frederick (Rick) Hyman

Subscribe to Frederick (Rick) Hyman's Posts

Restructuring and bankruptcy counsel require a broad and deep skill set to guide their clients through difficult times. Whether representing financial institutions, purchasers of distressed assets, or companies facing challenges, Rick applies his 30 years of experience to help clients chart a path and maximize their outcome. Rick focuses his practice on the representation of domestic and foreign lenders in connection with in-court and out-of-court workouts and restructurings. He regularly advises agents and lenders in large and middle-market credit facilities in connection with the development of strategies to maximize their recoveries. Rick has extensive experience negotiating forbearance agreements and waivers, amendments, and all other elements of out-of-court restructuring and recapitalization.

Contact:Read more about Frederick (Rick) Hyman

According to reports, Saks Global Enterprises, a leader in luxury retail, is preparing to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection imminently. Saks houses such iconic brands as Saks Fifth Avenue, Bergdorf Goodman, and Neiman Marcus. Despite a recent recapitalization, the filing by this iconic company should not be a surprise to those following the industry closely. Retail has continued to face increased costs due to tariffs, inflationary pressures, ballooning consumer debt, and the continued rise of e-commerce competitors (including the upstart Quince). Total debt throughout the Saks enterprise is said to exceed $6 billion. The filing, when it comes, will follow a year-end missed interest payment in respect of certain notes, a sure signal of restructuring activity to come.

For lenders, landlords, suppliers, and other creditors, early preparation for a bankruptcy filing, and taking decisive steps during any bankruptcy case, will be critical to protecting interests and maximizing recoveries.Continue Reading Saks Global Enterprises Bankruptcy: What Creditors Need to Know Now

Recent weeks have seen several headline-grabbing instances of alleged financial frauds, leading directly to the bankruptcies of the First Brands and Tricolor corporate enterprises. Both companies are alleged to have engaged in deceptive off-balance sheet financing and double-pledging of collateral, tumbling into bankruptcy after these issues came to light. While their lenders will have to seek their recourse in costly and lengthy bankruptcy proceedings, the cases serve as sobering reminders to lenders of the critical importance of vigilant oversight and the need for transparency into their borrowers’ activities in today’s active and complex lending environment.Continue Reading Use of Field Exams and QOE Reports to Safeguard Lenders in Risky Times

While it’s not common for a lender to require an individual guaranty in order to extend commercial credit to an operating business[1], when such a requirement arises, the individual providing a guaranty should not take such a requirement lightly. If the guaranty is structured as a full recourse guaranty, it will create an obligation whereby the individual guarantor is responsible to repay the loan from his or her own personal assets. Individuals who convince themselves that a guaranty is just a lender formality and hope to rely on their relationship with their lender should a problem arise with the loan, may find their sense of comfort to be misplaced. A recent decision from the Southern District of New York serves as a reminder that well-drafted guarantees can and will be enforced.

In White Oak Glob. Advisors LLC v. Clarke, No. 24-CV-2128 (JSR), 2025 WL 2113436 (S.D.N.Y. July 29, 2025), Thomas and Ana Clarke (the “Clarkes”) each signed individual guarantees in favor of White Oak Global Advisors LLC (“White Oak”) in connection with loans that White Oak made to businesses indirectly owned by the Clarkes. The loans matured in 2023 and a total of over $200 million was outstanding at maturity. The parties agreed in the guaranty documents that the maximum liability of each guarantor under their respective guarantees was to be capped at $20 million per guarantor. The underlying dispute focused on whether the guarantees were applicable to a promissory note (the “Note”) that had been amended and restated numerous times and if so, whether the guarantees were unconscionable.Continue Reading Personal Guarantees: When a “Formality” Becomes a $20 Million Reality

2024 brought a number of headline stories that will impact the bankruptcy and restructuring market in 2025 and beyond. A few of those are summarized below.

LMEs (Of course).  Liability management exercises — sometimes referred to as “lender-on-lender violence” — continued on their growth trajectory during 2024, with restructuring advisors looking for (and finding) gaps in credit documents that allow for the practice.  While uptiers, drop-downs and double-dips were all the talk of the first 364 days of the year, the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in Serta coming on December 31st closed out the year with a bang (or a thud).  The Circuit Court reversed former Bankruptcy Judge David Jones’ ruling which had blessed Serta’s uptier transaction (allowing the majority lenders to leapfrog the non-participating lenders). Judge Jones’ original decision, coming from a prominent jurisdiction (Southern District of Texas) was a “stamp of approval” for many uptier transactions that came before and that followed.  Among other things, the District Court found that the exchange of existing debt for newly issued senior debt did not constitute an “open market purchase” because it was not made available to all lenders. The District Court further remanded to the Bankruptcy Court the question of whether the excluded lenders had valid counter-claims (breach of contract, etc.) against the participating lenders and the borrower. The court further stripped certain indemnification provisions that had been included in the plan to protect against such a ruling.  This brand new decision will likely have a dramatic impact on the feasibility of future LME transactions (at least until the drafting catches up). Others transactions that do not rely on open market purchases (J.Crew, for example) will be less impacted by the ruling. Continue Reading Bankruptcy and Restructuring in the US:  A Snapshot of 2024

Bankruptcy filings in the digital asset space continue, as cryptocurrency exchange Bittrex filed for bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on Monday, May 8, 2023. The Bankruptcy Docket can be found here. Desolation Holdings LLC and its affiliated debtors, Bittrex, Inc., Bittrex Malta Holdings Ltd., and Bittrex Mala Ltd., as debtors and debtors in possession (“Bittrex US”) filed their chapter 11 petitions alongside a plan of liquidation. Unlike other exchanges that have sought to reorganize in fits and starts, Bittrex US heads directly to liquidation. Activities outside of the US, including Bittrex Global, shall continue uninterrupted by the filing.Continue Reading Bittrex: Regulatory Enforcement and Macroeconomic Headwinds Lead to Another Crypto Bankruptcy

After a pause in 2022, there has been much talk of the continuation, or resumption, of a wave of retail bankruptcy cases as we begin 2023.  2022 was highlighted by Revlon’s filing (discussed here: Revlon May Signal Another Wave of Retail Bankruptcies | Retail & Consumer Products Law Observer (retailconsumerproductslaw.com)).  Revlon pointed to a number of issues that led to its filing, including most prominently, supply chain issues. Severe impediments in the supply chain – whether the inability to source product or the costs and delays in received goods — have been cited by many debtors since Revlon since as a leading cause of their distress.  And it may get much worse before it gets better, particularly for companies that source, directly or indirectly, from China.Continue Reading Continued Pain in the Retail Sector:  Coming Enforcement of Forced Labor Laws

Genesis Global’s Chapter 11 filing on January 20th was little surprise to those closely following the cryptocurrency markets and after its decision to “pause” withdrawals in mid-November. Digital Currency Group, Inc. (“DCG”), the parent of Genesis Global Holdco LLC (“Genesis”) and its largest borrower, is not part of the bankruptcy case and instead may…

Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code provides a mechanism for United States cooperation and coordination with insolvency proceedings abroad, often affording foreign debtors wide-ranging relief and expansive rights through the United States Bankruptcy Court system.  Not all proceedings in foreign jurisdictions are eligible — in order to be so, a proceeding must constitute a “foreign proceeding” under the Bankruptcy Code. The Bankruptcy Code defines a “foreign proceeding” as “a collective judicial or administrative proceeding in a foreign country…  under a law relating to insolvency or adjustment of debt in which proceeding the assets and affairs of the debtor are subject to control or supervision by a foreign court, for the purpose of reorganization or liquidation.”  It is generally understood that the definition should be interpreted liberally. Recently, the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York tested the limits of Chapter 15, providing important guidance regarding the eligibility of proceedings that do not involve “insolvency or the identification, classification, or satisfaction of debt.” See In re Global Cord Blood Corporation, Case No. 22-11347 (December 5, 2022).Continue Reading A Line in the Sand: Caymans Proceeding Ineligible for Chapter 15

Shoba Pillay, the Examiner appointed in Celsius’ bankruptcy cases, filed her interim report on November 19, 2022.  The Celsius Examiner’s report provides some important insight into a crypto-exchange’s operational and risk management failures which may provide investors and creditors some insight into what to expect in FTX.

The initial report provides important insight on the…