Dime Bancorp Inc (fka DIMEQ)

[Kharybdis]

I read the Opinions, so i'll be your Huckleberry. While the Court did opine that the GSA and Plan were “fair and reasonable” overall and also ostensibly with respect to the LTW Holders, what you omit to include in your analysis is WHY the Court originally ruled as such with respect to the LTW Holders. The reality is that the Court allowed the Debtors to sell the Anchor Litigation “free and clear” of the obligations to the LTW Holders because “the proceeds being received under the Global Settlement are more than the value of the Anchor Litigation.”

The Court went further to say that “the interests of the LTW Holders are adequately protected by the disputed claims holdback provisions of the Plan so long as the reserve for their claims is set at $347 million.” See Walrath Opinion Denying Confirmation [Dkt. No. 6528 at p. 50].

Thus the Court left open the possibility that a breach of contract or any of the other myriad transgressions asserted by the LTW Plaintiffs could give rise to an Allowed Claim for the LTW Holders, notwithstanding the “fairness” and “reasonableness” of the GSA and POR. But note that the Court's holding that "adequate protection" was afforded via the Disputed Claims Reserve would obviously be protection that came AFTER the alleged breach and AFTER the LTW Holders had to fight tooth and nail to get the protection as opposed to the Debtors and its Board protecting the LTW Holders from the outset in accordance with the terms of the LTW Agreement.