
Robert A. Marsico
Partner
201-896-7165 rmarsico@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Robert A. Marsico
Date: November 22, 2013

Partner
201-896-7165 rmarsico@sh-law.comThe requirement that large banks submit written plans for rapid and orderly resolution in bankruptcy in the event of financial failure is a key feature of the federal government’s plan to keep the 2008 financial crisis from repeating. However, many banks still need to fine-tune their resolution plans, according to federal regulators.
Under the Dodd-Frank Act, certain large U.S. financial institutions must submit resolution plans to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors (Board) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), which detail the banks’ strategies for liquidation or reorganization under the U.S. bankruptcy code in the event of material financial distress or failure. The plans, which are required in response to the “too big too fail” problem of the 2008 financial meltdown, call for banks to manage a similar crisis without extraordinary government assistance.
Financial institutions with $250 billion or more in U.S. nonbank assets were required to submit their initial plans last summer. Those firms include Bank of America Corporation, Bank of New York Mellon Corporation, Barclays PLC, Citigroup Inc., Credit Suisse Group AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Morgan Stanley, State Street Corporation, and UBS AG.
However, the regulators ultimately determined that most of the submitted resolution plans fell short. In subsequent Federal Reserve guidance, the FDIC and the Board called for more detailed information and analysis regarding how the firms would address obstacles to resolvability under the Bankruptcy Code, including multiple competing insolvencies, global issues, financial market utility interconnections, and funding and liquidity. The regulators also required the banks to provide additional support for the strategies and assumptions contained in their resolution plans.
In essence, the agencies want to ensure that the resolution plans offer a credible strategy rather than simply fulfill a regulatory requirement. If the Board and the FDIC are still not satisfied, they have the power to force restructuring, although such a drastic measure is unlikely. The next group of banks —those with less than $100 billion total U.S., non-bank assets — must submit their final plans by the end of the year.
If you have any questions about the new resolution plan requirements or would like to discuss the legal issues involved, please contact me, Robert Marisco, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!