Lessons from In re ConvergeOne Holdings, Inc.
Authors: Asiyah Khan & Charles Rubio
The Southern District of Texas recently tackled the complex doctrine of equitable mootness in the bankruptcy appeal of In re ConvergeOne Holdings, Inc.. At the heart of the case was whether the appeal of excluded creditors should be dismissed because of the substantial progress of ConvergeOne’s Chapter 11 reorganization plan. The court declined to apply equitable mootness, highlighting that the doctrine should not shield plans from legitimate challenges unless granting relief would truly disrupt the reorganization.
This decision underscores the importance of judicial restraint, reminding us that equitable mootness is not a one-size-fits-all tool. Instead, courts must carefully weigh factors like the ability to provide targeted relief without unraveling the plan. The case also reinforces the need to preserve the right to appeal while balancing the finality of bankruptcy orders.
The ConvergeOne ruling is a powerful reminder that equitable mootness should only be invoked when necessary to protect the integrity of reorganization efforts—not as a blanket shield against judicial review.
For a deeper understanding of the legal principles and nuances discussed, we suggest reading the full case in its entirety. You may find the full case citation here; In re ConvergeOne Holdings Inc., No. 24-cv-02001 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 23, 2024). Please also check out the full Article on this matter posted to Law360. The content of this blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It provides a summary, and the referenced materials should be reviewed for full details. The information may not reflect current legal developments. Please consult with your attorney for legal guidance.
Topics Discussed: