Stay Connected

In The News

Print

Gene Kohut: Chapter and verse: Fiduciary roles present a variety of legal challenges – LegalNews.com

Gene Kohut was featured in Macomb County’s Legal News article titled “Chapter and verse: Fiduciary roles present a variety of legal challenges.”

Gene Kohut considered his BBA in finance from Western Michigan University a good starting point for a career in business law. How right he was. Kohut, an attorney and managing director with the consulting firm Conway MacKenzie in Birmingham, realized early on that his interests were in serving as a fiduciary for distressed situations.

“It happened by accident,” he said. “My interest began 20 years ago, when I represented a bankruptcy trustee. I found the work compelling enough to pursue the opportunity to become a trustee with the Department of Justice.”

During his years as a trustee, Kohut became increasingly interested in the distressed side of businesses—and from there, began serving in other fiduciary roles such as court-appointed receiver, interim business manager, chief restructuring officer, Chapter 11 trustee and liquidating trustee in post-confirmation Chapter 11 situations. He served as well as a panel receiver for the Security and Exchange Commission’s collection unit.

“My role as a fiduciary has given me exposure to a vast array of industries as I oversee the wind down of company operations,” he said. “To me, it’s exciting work as each day provides a new experience. One never know what industry or matter will be coming across my desk.”

Conway MacKenzie is expanding its fiduciary practice nationally, he adds.

“We’ve been exposed to many more significant cases,” he said, “and that, of course, brings more significant problems and issues — it’s both satisfying and challenging at the same time.”

Kohut, who has liquidated numerous assets and managed business operations in more than 15,000 Chapter 7 cases, noted that Michigan’s new receivership laws clarify in more detail the responsibilities, duties and powers the receiver has, as well as sets out a more consistent process by which receivers are nominated and appointed.

“Prior to the changes enacted in February 2018,” he said, “there was really no uniformity or guidelines by which a party seeking the appointment of a receiver or for that matter, the court had in order to decide whether somebody was qualified.

To read the entire article click here.