IN RE: LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC., Debtor.Jennifer Adler, Ian Anderson, Jennifer Becker, Craig Benson, Paola Biraschi, Karen Brewer, William Broadbent, David Brooks, Guillemette Callies, Patrick Cremin, Michael Collier, Joseph D'Amadeo, John Dmuchowski, Nestor De Jesus, Steven Engel, Louise Goldberg, Michael Gran, Anshuman Goyal, Adrian Graves, Sandra Hahn-Colbert, Gregg Hawes, Nicholas Howard, Julian Iragorri, Harriet Chan King, Karen Krieger, Tal Lev Ari, Yeruchim Levilev, Sarah Lewis, Patricia Luken, Lawrence McCarthy, Michael McCully, Paul Shotton, Steven Schwab, Colin S.A. Welch, Pierluigi Volini, Ian Neville, Sandy Fleischman Richman, Jeffrey Wecker, Norman Siegel, Thomas O'Sullivan, Peter Ward, Timothy Wilkinson, Milan Veleba, Andrea Sullivan, Hugh McGee, Judith Winchester, Ross Shapiro, Stephen Snelling, Brian Seward, Margaret Smith, Alvaro Santodomingo, Helmut Olivier, (Estate of) Michael Mullen, Jack Rivkin, Barry Porter, Gregg Somma, Christiane Schuster, Michael Petrucelli, Martin Patterson, Fabio Liotti, Mary Langevin, Amit K. Sarkar, Darian J. Cohen, Lars P. Jacobson, Christian E. Stevens, Andrew Wideman, Madelyn Antoncic, Michele Bareggi, Riccardo Banchetti, Timothy A. Burke, Nachiketa Das, Philippe Dufournier, Brian Gross, Peter Hornick, Andrea Jao, Michael Lawsky, Alexandre Catalao Maia, Nikki Marshall, Richard Noble, Anke Parr, Vincent Primiano, Giancarlo Saronne, Johathan Sebiri, Charles Spero, Harshad Shah, Gordon Sweely, Rocco F. Andriola, Morgan Lawrence, Nicole Lawrence, Marvin C. Schwartz, Stephanie Stiefel, Richard J. Glasebrook, II, Judith Ann Kenney, Richard Nackerson, Henry Ramallo, Christian Reynolds, David I. Weiner, Richard Levine, Seth Finkel, Claimants-Appellants, Virgilio Casuple, Donald Boughrum, Brian Monahan, Roger Saks, Claimants, v. Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Debtor-Appellee.*Link to the text of the note, 855 F.3d 459


Summary

HOLDINGS: [1]-Even if restricted stock units (RSUs) held by employees of a Chapter 11 debtor were "equity securities" under 11 U.S.C.S. § 101(16), at least some of the employees' proofs of claim against the debtor were not subject to disallowance on that basis alone. The employees asserted breach of contract claims that were distinct from any equity interest; [2]-The employees' claims were subordinated pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 510(b) because the RSUs were securities under § 101(49)(xiv), as they bore hallmarks of interests commonly known as securities; the employees purchased the RSUs by agreeing to receive them, in lieu of cash, in exchange for a portion of their labor; and the claims arose from a securities transaction.