hard · Corporate Credit Analysis

Under the absolute priority rule and the secured/unsecured bifurcation of an undersecured claim, which objection is most legally and analytically sound?

1. The senior class holds a $450M secured claim and a $150M unsecured deficiency claim; calling them 'unimpaired' is improper, and the $80M equity must be tested against the recovery the *unsecured deficiency* would receive pari passu with other unsecured creditors — not handed preferentially to the senior class.
2. The senior class is oversecured, so it is entitled to post-petition interest on the full $600M, and the plan actually underpays them by omitting that accrual.
3. The plan is valid because secured lenders always recover par in a cram-down; the $450M loan plus $80M equity exceeds the $600M claim, so no priority issue arises.
4. The deficiency claim of $150M is extinguished at confirmation because the collateral was surrendered, so the senior class has no unsecured stake and the junior class lacks standing to object.

Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →