HTML Document View

Full title: Document TMI TRUST COMPANYS STATUS REPORT REGARDING ITS MOTION FOR ORDER (I) REQUIRING THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE TO APPOINT A SEPARATE COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS AND/OR (II) REINSTATING TMI TRUST COMPANY AS A MEMBER OF AND RECONSTITUTING THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS (Related to ECF 521) Filed by TMI Trust Company (Rubin, David) (Entered: 06/11/2021)

Document posted on Jun 10, 2021 in the bankruptcy, 16 pages and 0 tables.

Bankrupt11 Summary (Automatically Generated)

745 the Bond Trustee’s optimism turned out to be misplaced because the United States Trustee (the “UST”) not only refused to appoint the Bond Trustee to the Commercial Creditors’ Committee despite the fact that it is by far the largest unsecured creditor in this case, but has now, together with the Tort Committee (defined below) raised issues with the fact that the Bond Trustee chose to request (and was granted) ex officio status on the Commercial Creditors’ Committee rather than to subject the Debtor to the additional expense and delay that would be associated with pursuing the balance of the Committee Motion.7 Memorandum Opinion and Order [ECF No. 745]; Order Directing United States Trustee to Appoint Additional Committee of Commercial Unsecured Creditors [ECF No. 746].But given that the UST and the Tort Committee have tipped their hand by raising issues about even the Bond Trustee’s ex officio status, the Bond Trustee has no choice but to ask the Court’s indulgence in keeping the Committee Motion on the docket so that, if the UST and Tort Committee challenge the Bond Trustee’s ex officio status, the Bond Trustee can quickly proceed on the Removal Issue and seek to be officially appointed to the Commercial Creditors’ Committee.; London: Operates as a separate UK registered legal entity; Mexico City: Operates as Greenberg Traurig, S.C.; Milan: Greenberg Traurig’s Milan office is operated by Greenberg Traurig Santa Maria, an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Seoul: Operated by Greenberg Traurig LLP Foreign Legal Consultant Office; Tel Aviv: A branch of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Florida, USA; Tokyo: Greenberg Traurig’s Tokyo Office is operated by GT Tokyo Horitsu Jimusho and Greenberg Traurig Gaikokuhojimubengoshi Jimusho, affiliates of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Warsaw: Operates as Greenberg Traurig Grzesiak SP.K.; London: Operates as a separate UK registered legal entity; Mexico City: Operates as Greenberg Traurig, S.C.; Milan: Greenberg Traurig’s Milan office is operated by Greenberg Traurig Santa Maria, an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Seoul: Operated by Greenberg Traurig LLP Foreign Legal Consultant Office; Tel Aviv: A branch of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Florida, USA; Tokyo: Greenberg Traurig’s Tokyo Office is operated by GT Tokyo Horitsu Jimusho and Greenberg Traurig Gaikokuhojimubengoshi Jimusho, affiliates of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Warsaw: Operates as Greenberg Traurig Grzesiak SP.K.

List of Tables

Document Contents

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA In re: Case No. 20-10846 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH Section “A” OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF NEW ORLEANS, Chapter 11 Debtor.1 TMI TRUST COMPANY’S STATUS REPORT REGARDING ITS MOTION FOR ORDER (I) REQUIRING THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE TO APPOINT A SEPARATE COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS AND/OR (II) REINSTATING TMI TRUST COMPANY AS A MEMBER OF AND RECONSTITUTING THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS [Related to ECF No. 521] TMI Trust Company, as indenture trustee (the “Bond Trustee”), by and through counsel, hereby files this Status Report (the “Status Report”) regarding its Motion for Order (I) Requiring the United States Trustee to Appoint a Separate Committee of Unsecured Creditors and/or (II) Reinstating TMI Trust Company as a Member of and Reconstituting the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors [ECF No. 521] (the “Committee Motion”). I. INTRODUCTION 1. When the Court entered its Memorandum Opinion and Order (the “Order”)2 ordering the United States Trustee to appoint a separate committee of unsecured commercial creditors (the “Commercial Creditors Committee”), the Bond Trustee was optimistic that the Court’s Order would resolve all issues relating to adequate representation of unsecured creditors in this case and allow the case to move forward towards a plan of reorganization. Unfortunately, 1 The last four digits of the Debtor’s federal tax identification number are 8966. The Debtor’s principal place of business is located at 7887 Walmsley Ave., New Orleans, LA 70125. 2 ECF No. 745

1

the Bond Trustee’s optimism turned out to be misplaced because the United States Trustee (the “UST”) not only refused to appoint the Bond Trustee to the Commercial Creditors’ Committee despite the fact that it is by far the largest unsecured creditor in this case, but has now, together with the Tort Committee (defined below) raised issues with the fact that the Bond Trustee chose to request (and was granted) ex officio status on the Commercial Creditors’ Committee rather than to subject the Debtor to the additional expense and delay that would be associated with pursuing the balance of the Committee Motion. II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND A. Procedural History 2. On October 28, 2020, the Bond Trustee filed the Committee Motion. 3. On November 6, 2020, First Bank and Trust filed a Joinder to the Committee Motion.3 4. On November 11, 2020, the Bond Trustee filed its Motion to Bifurcate the Legal and Evidentiary Hearings with Respect to its Motion for Order (I) Requiring the United States Trustee to Appoint a Separate Committee of Unsecured Creditors and/or (II) Reinstating TMI Trust Company as a Member of and Reconstituting the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors [ECF No. 546] (“Motion to Bifurcate”). 5. On November 13, 2020, the Court held a hearing on the Motion to Bifurcate. At the hearing the parties agreed to only proceed on the issue of whether the composition of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the “Tort Committee”) adequately represented the creditor body (the “Adequate Representation Issue”). The remaining relief sought in the Committee 3 Joinder in TMI Trust Company’s Motion for Order (I) Requiring the United States Trustee to Appoint a Separate Committee of Unsecured Creditors and/or (II) Reinstating TMI Trust Company as a Member of and Reconstituting the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors [ECF No. 533].

2

Motion, relating to the Bond Trustee’s removal from the Tort Committee (the “Removal Issue”) was expressly reserved.4 6. On December 11, 2020, the Tort Committee filed an Opposition to the Committee Motion.5 The UST also filed an Objection to the Committee Motion.6 7. On December 17, 2020, the Court held a hearing on the Adequate Representation Issue. 8. On February 8, 2021, the Court granted the Committee Motion with respect to the Adequate Representation Issue and ordered the UST to appoint an additional committee of commercial unsecured creditors.7 B. Developments Since the Order 9. On February 11, 2021, counsel for the Bond Trustee reached out to Amanda George of the UST’s office to request an opportunity to speak with Ms. George regarding the formation of the Commercial Creditors’ Committee. See Emails between C. Murphy and A. George attached as Exhibit 1. Ms. George replied that the Bond Trustee would be receiving “correspondence from us regarding Committee formation soon.” The Bond Trustee’s counsel replied to Ms. George on February 12, 2021 that counsel was: hoping that we could speak prior to the solicitation process if possible. We hope that with the Court’s decision and recognition of the importance of ensuring adequate representation of all types of unsecured creditors, including 4 See Docket Entry [ECF No. 552]. 5 Opposition of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and Memorandum of Points and Authorities Regarding Adequate Representation of the Committee Under 11 U.S.C. § 1102 in Connection with TMI Trust Company’s Motion for Order (I) Requiring the United States Trustee to Appoint a Separate Committee of Unsecured Creditors and/or (II) Reinstating TMI Trust Company as a Member of and Reconstituting the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors [ECF No. 626]. 6 United States Trustee’s objection to TMI Trust Company’s Motion for Order (I) Requiring the United States Trustee to Appoint a Separate Committee of Unsecured Creditors and/or (II) Reinstating TMI Trust Company as a Member of and Reconstituting the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors [ECF No. 629]. 7 Memorandum Opinion and Order [ECF No. 745]; Order Directing United States Trustee to Appoint Additional Committee of Commercial Unsecured Creditors [ECF No. 746].

3

specifically the holders of public debt, that you may have a different view of [the Bond Trustee] and the composition of this new committee than you have had in the past. It would be helpful for us to understand your office’s current thinking. The Court left open [the Bond Trustee’s] right to litigate issues respecting committee composition further, but we are hoping to have a productive conversation with your office to see if there is a way we can avoid further litigation. Can we schedule a time to speak? We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Thanks. Emails between C. Murphy and A. George attached as Exhibit 1. 10. On February 21, 2021, the Bond Trustee timely filed an application requesting that the UST appoint it to the Commercial Creditors’ Committee. See Committee Application attached as Exhibit 2. In the transmittal email to Ms. George and Mary Langston, the Bond Trustee’s counsel renewed the Bond Trustee’s request to discuss the solicitation process with the UST’s office since the Bond Trustee had not received a response from Ms. George to its February 12, 2021 email. Exhibit 1. Ms. George replied on February 21, 2021 to confirm receipt of the Bond Trustee’s application to join the Commercial Creditors’ Committee stating that she understood the Bond Trustee’s Counsel’s “desire to discuss the U.S. Trustee’s ‘view’ of [the Bond Trustee] serving on the Committee. At this time, I do not have any information to share on that topic, as we are early in the solicitation process.” Exhibit 1. Thus, the UST refused to provide the Bond Trustee an opportunity to discuss its application to join the Commercial Creditors’ Committee. 11. Predictably, on March 4, 2021, the U.S. Trustee appointed the Commercial Creditors Committee and did not include the Bond Trustee as a member.8 Inexplicably, the UST appointed an even number of creditors to the Commercial Creditors’ Committee, and, of course, by omitting the Bond Trustee, continued its policy of attempting to deny the holders of public debt fair representation in this case. 8 Notice of Appointment of Unsecured Commercial Creditors’ Committee [ECF No. 772].

4

12. The UST’s continued bias against the Bond Trust is problematic not only because the Bond Trustee is by far the largest creditor in this case but, as the Court has pointed out, the Bond Trustee represents a type of commercial debt that is otherwise not represented by the members of the Commercial Creditors’ Committee. 13. Because the Bond Trustee believed that it is important to the reorganization process for it to have a voice in this case, and because it was concerned about the additional time and delay that would result from pursuing the Removal Issue, the Bond Trustee’s counsel reached out to counsel for the newly-formed Commercial Creditors’ Committee to request that it be appointed as an ex officio member of the Commercial Creditors’ Committee. The Commercial Creditors’ Committee voted, on April 7, 2021, to add the Bond Trustee as an ex officio member. While this was not an ideal result for the Bond Trustee or the holders of the over $38 million in public debt for which it serves as indenture trustee, the Bond Trustee thought it was the best result, under the circumstances. 14. But, as the Bond Trustee has since learned, no good deed goes unpunished. Instead of being grateful that the Bond Trustee stood down from pursuing the Removal Issue to allow this case to move forward, both the Tort Committee and the UST have now raised issues with the Bond Trustee’s ex officio membership on the Commercial Creditors’ Committee in a transparent attempt to once again deny the Bond Trustee and its constituents a voice in this case. III. STATUS 15. Given all of this, the Bond Trustee is understandably concerned that the UST and the Tort Committee will continue their efforts to deny the Bond Trustee a seat at the table in this case. If this were an ordinary case it would be an easy decision for the Bond Trustee to dismiss the balance of the Committee Motion and accept the lesser role of ex officio member on the

5

Commercial Creditors’ Committee. But given that the UST and the Tort Committee have tipped their hand by raising issues about even the Bond Trustee’s ex officio status, the Bond Trustee has no choice but to ask the Court’s indulgence in keeping the Committee Motion on the docket so that, if the UST and Tort Committee challenge the Bond Trustee’s ex officio status, the Bond Trustee can quickly proceed on the Removal Issue and seek to be officially appointed to the Commercial Creditors’ Committee. [Signature Page Follows]

6

DATED: June 11, 2021 Respectfully submitted, /s/ John D. Elrod_________________ John D. Elrod GREENBERG TRAURIG Terminus 200 3333 Piedmont Road NE, Suite 2500 Atlanta, GA 30305 Telephone: (678) 553-2100 Email: elrodj@gtlaw.com Annette Jarvis GREENBERG TRAURIG 222 S. Main Street, Fifth Floor Salt Lake City, UT 84101 Telephone: (801) 478-6907 Email: jarvisa@gtlaw.com Colleen A. Murphy GREENBERG TRAURIG One International Place Suite, 2000 Boston, MA 02110 Telephone: (617) 310-6000 Email: murphyc@gtlaw.com -and- /s/ David S. Rubin _______________ David S. Rubin (La. 11525) BUTLER SNOW LLP 445 North Boulevard, Suite 300 Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Telephone: (225) 325-8728 Email: david.rubin@butlersnow.com Attorneys for TMI Trust Company

7

EXHIBIT 1

8

From: George, Amanda B. (USTP) <Amanda.B.George@usdoj.gov> Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2021 7:24 PM To: Murphy, Colleen A. (Shld-BOS-BD) <murphyc@gtlaw.com> Cc: Langston, Mary (USTP) <Mary.Langston@usdoj.gov> Subject: RE: Archdiocese of New Orleans Dear Colleen, This email confirms our receipt of the Questionnaire; thank you. I understand your desire to discuss the U.S. Trustee’s “view” of TMI serving on the Committee. At this time, I do not have any information to share on that topic, as we are early in the solicitation process. Sincerely, Amanda Burnette George, Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Office of the U.S. Trustee CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All components of this email message are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. From: murphyc@gtlaw.com <murphyc@gtlaw.com> Sent: Sunday, February 21, 2021 11:44 AM To: George, Amanda B. (USTP) <Amanda.B.George@UST.DOJ.GOV> Cc: Langston, Mary (USTP) <Mary.Langston@UST.DOJ.GOV> Subject: RE: Archdiocese of New Orleans Hi Amanda, hope you are well. Attached is TMI’s completed questionnaire for the new Archdiocese of New Orleans committee. TMI is also sending the original directly to you. I also wanted to follow up on the emails I sent you on February 11th and 12th requesting a call with you. I haven’t received a response from you other than your February 11th email indicating we would receive the formation information. We would very much appreciate an opportunity to speak with you this week regarding your office’s view of TMI serving on the new committee. Can we please schedule a time to discuss early this week? Thanks and enjoy the rest of the weekend. Colleen A. Murphy Shareholder Greenberg Traurig, LLP One International Place | Suite 2000 | Boston, MA 02110 T 617 310 5239 murphyc@gtlaw.com | www.gtlaw.com | View GT Biography Albany. Amsterdam. Atlanta. Austin. Boston. Berlin*. Chicago. Dallas. Delaware. Denver. Fort Lauderdale. Houston. Las Vegas. London*. Los Angeles. Mexico City*. Miami. Milan*. Minneapolis. New Jersey. New York. Northern Virginia. Orange County. Orlando. Philadelphia. Phoenix. Sacramento. Salt Lake City. San Francisco. Seoul*. Shanghai. Silicon Valley. Tallahassee. Tampa. Tel Aviv*. Tokyo*. Warsaw*. Washington, D.C. West Palm Beach. Westchester County.

9

*Berlin: Greenberg Traurig’s Berlin Office is operated by Greenberg Traurig Germany, an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP.; London: Operates as a separate UK registered legal entity; Mexico City: Operates as Greenberg Traurig, S.C.; Milan: Greenberg Traurig’s Milan office is operated by Greenberg Traurig Santa Maria, an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Seoul: Operated by Greenberg Traurig LLP Foreign Legal Consultant Office; Tel Aviv: A branch of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Florida, USA; Tokyo: Greenberg Traurig’s Tokyo Office is operated by GT Tokyo Horitsu Jimusho and Greenberg Traurig Gaikokuhojimubengoshi Jimusho, affiliates of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Warsaw: Operates as Greenberg Traurig Grzesiak SP.K. From: Murphy, Colleen A. (Shld-BOS-BD) Sent: Friday, February 12, 2021 9:12 AM To: 'George, Amanda B. (USTP)' <Amanda.B.George@usdoj.gov> Cc: Langston, Mary (USTP) <Mary.Langston@usdoj.gov> Subject: RE: Archdiocese of New Orleans Thanks very much Amanda. I was actually hoping that we could speak prior to the solicitation process if possible. We hope that with the Court’s decision and recognition of the importance of ensuring adequate representation of all types of unsecured creditors, including specifically the holders of public debt, that you may have a different view of TMI and the composition of this new committee than you have had in the past. It would be helpful for us to understand your office’s current thinking. The Court left open TMI’s right to litigate issues respecting committee composition further, but we are hoping to have a productive conversation with your office to see if there is a way we can avoid further litigation. Can we schedule a time to speak? We appreciate your time and attention to this matter. Thanks Colleen A. Murphy Shareholder Greenberg Traurig, LLP One International Place | Suite 2000 | Boston, MA 02110 T 617 310 5239 murphyc@gtlaw.com | www.gtlaw.com | View GT Biography Albany. Amsterdam. Atlanta. Austin. Boston. Berlin*. Chicago. Dallas. Delaware. Denver. Fort Lauderdale. Houston. Las Vegas. London*. Los Angeles. Mexico City*. Miami. Milan*. Minneapolis. New Jersey. New York. Northern Virginia. Orange County. Orlando. Philadelphia. Phoenix. Sacramento. Salt Lake City. San Francisco. Seoul*. Shanghai. Silicon Valley. Tallahassee. Tampa. Tel Aviv*. Tokyo*. Warsaw*. Washington, D.C. West Palm Beach. Westchester County. *Berlin: Greenberg Traurig’s Berlin Office is operated by Greenberg Traurig Germany, an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP.; London: Operates as a separate UK registered legal entity; Mexico City: Operates as Greenberg Traurig, S.C.; Milan: Greenberg Traurig’s Milan office is operated by Greenberg Traurig Santa Maria, an affiliate of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Seoul: Operated by Greenberg Traurig LLP Foreign Legal Consultant Office; Tel Aviv: A branch of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Florida, USA; Tokyo: Greenberg Traurig’s Tokyo Office is operated by GT Tokyo Horitsu Jimusho and Greenberg Traurig Gaikokuhojimubengoshi Jimusho, affiliates of Greenberg Traurig, P.A. and Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Warsaw: Operates as Greenberg Traurig Grzesiak SP.K. From: George, Amanda B. (USTP) <Amanda.B.George@usdoj.gov> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 12:57 PM To: Murphy, Colleen A. (Shld-BOS-BD) <murphyc@gtlaw.com> Cc: Langston, Mary (USTP) <Mary.Langston@usdoj.gov> Subject: RE: Archdiocese of New Orleans *EXTERNAL TO GT*

10

Colleen, Thank you for your email. You should receive correspondence from us regarding Committee formation soon. Hope you and yours are staying safe and well, Sincerely, Amanda Burnette George, Trial Attorney United States Department of Justice Office of the U.S. Trustee CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: All components of this email message are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. From: murphyc@gtlaw.com <murphyc@gtlaw.com> Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2021 7:58 AM To: George, Amanda B. (USTP) <Amanda.B.George@UST.DOJ.GOV> Subject: Archdiocese of New Orleans Hi Amanda, hope you are well. I was hoping to catch up with you on the formation of the new Committee. Can you let me know if you have time to speak tomorrow? Thanks very much. Colleen A. Murphy Shareholder Greenberg Traurig, LLP One International Place | Suite 2000 | Boston, MA 02110 T 617 310 5239 murphyc@gtlaw.com | www.gtlaw.com | View GT Biography If you are not an intended recipient of confidential and privileged information in this email, please delete it, notify us immediately at postmaster@gtlaw.com, and do not use or disseminate the information.

11

EXHIBIT 2

12

13

14

15

16