Laserfiche WebLink
Case 1:20-bk-12043 Doc 453 Filed 10/06/20 Entered 10/06/20 15:2&47 Desc Main <br />Document Page 8 of 9 <br />II. There is no Cause to Lift the Automatic Stay <br />21. In cases where the Debtors and the directors and officers share in proceeds of a <br />policy, and therefore the proceeds are, at least in part, property of the estate, courts will examine <br />whether cause exists to lift the stay. See, e.g., CyberMedica, 280 B.R. at 18 (finding cause to lift <br />stay so that directors and officers could exercise their contractual rights to have their defense costs <br />paid in order to prevent irreparable harm to the directors and officers who were incurring costs). <br />However, in CyberMedica and the other cases relied on by Mr. Hughs, the directors and officers <br />had direct contractual rights to make claims under those policies. <br />22. Here, are discussed above, Mr. Hughs does not have a direct contractual right to <br />proceeds from the Policy. Therefore, there is no cause to lift the stay to allow him to turn his <br />potential general unsecured indemnification claim against the Debtors into a fully paid insurance <br />claim, and deplete assets of the estate which could be used for the benefit of all creditors. <br />Therefore, the Court should deny the Motion. <br />WHEREFOR, the Committee respectfully requests that the Court deny the Motion. <br />Dated: October 6, 2020 <br />n <br />Isl T. Kent Barber <br />BARBER LAW PLLC <br />KY Bar No. 092456 <br />2200 Burrus Drive <br />Lexington, KY 40513 <br />(859) 296-4372 <br />kbarber@barberlawky.com <br />-and- <br />Geoffrey S. Goodman (pro hac vice) <br />Matthew D. Lee (pro hac vice) <br />FOLEY & LARDNER LLP <br />321 N. Clark Street, Suite 2800 <br />Chicago, IL 60654 <br />Telephone: (312) 832-4514 <br />Facsimile: (312) 832-4700 <br />