Tag Archives: jp morgan chase

The Ad Hoc Committee of Consignors Objects to Diamond’s Trustee’s Motion to Borrowing from JPMorgan Chase Bank

As expected, the Ad Hoc Committee of Consignors has submitted a motion objecting to Diamond’s Trustee Morgan W. Fisher‘s motion asking to borrow a limited amount of money from JPMorgan Chase Bank and to use cash collateral.

In their motion, the Ad Hoc Committee states their reasons line up with the objections submitted by Alliance Entertainment earlier int he week.

The Ad Hoc Committee goes further stating that Fisher had the opportunity in December 2025 to reject the contracts Diamond could no longer afford and resolve outstanding litigation. Instead, Fisher has chosen to “double down” and “seek costly financing to employ a team of professionals to pursue litigation claims.”

They point out that the financing does nothing beyond adding additional administrative burden on Diamond in the hope of recovering consigned stock that would only benefit JPMorgan Chase Bank.

The Ad Hoc Committee goes further with a pretty blunt point:

With no employees, lapsed insurance policy with no insurance on the stock, a growing rent obligation to its purchaser of non-consignment stock, and no way to distribute the consigned stock, the Debtor has proposed no viable mechanism by which it could distribute stock at a cost that permits it to cover the cost of the proposed financing and additional rent and insurance charges in so doing. In other words, the Debtor has no hope of distributing any stock; it cannot afford to store and insure the stock; and yet it wants to borrow more money from its lender so that the lender can get paid 100% of whatever the Debtor recoups from a liquidation that would decimate the value of the property.

They go on further focusing on the consigned goods which are still in question highlighting in the distribution deal, Diamond is entitled to 10% of the MSRP of the sale of consigned stock but are now trying to get 100% of the proceeds to pay their lender.

But going back to the Trustee’s plan…

Fisher laid out three avenues to gain revenue if the loan from JPMorgan is approved, with litigation being a few of them. Though it’s the plan, Fisher doesn’t go into the likelihood that any of the litigation succeeds. There could be more debt incurred through this plan with no gain from it at all. There’s also no timeline which means no projected further cost to Diamond as well as if there is success, the cost of distributing the consigned goods.

As is, Sparkle Pop offered $1 million to purchase the consigned stock but four months have passed and the cost to rent the warehouse by Diamond is currently $576,000 with $144,000 per month. The amount they’d have to pay in storage outweighs the possible benefit of selling it. With warehouse rent owed on the stock, the lack of insurance, and more, the Ad Hoc Committee emphasizes that Diamond is in violation of its agreements to hold onto the stock. They also state they have an administrative claim if Diamond is able to sell the stock.

With all of that, the Ad Hoc Committee argues that borrowing money from JPMorgan to fund litigation isn’t in Diamond’s best interest and is only in the interest of JPMorgan who Diamond owes about $7 million.

You can read the full motion below.

Alliance Entertainment Objects to Diamond’s Trustee Motion for Limited Borrowing from JPMorgan Chase Bank

In early April, Diamond trustee Morgan W. Fisher filed a motion with the court for new financing from JPMorgan Chase Bank. That bank originally financed Diamond’s chapter 11 case with “debtor in possession” financing. JPMorgan also refused to provide more to Diamond which was a reason the case was changed to chapter 7.

Fisher asked the court for a new DIP credit agreement where the Trustee Borrowings are capped at $766,000.00 in new advances, plus such further uses of cash collateral.

In the filing, Fisher laid out three avenues for revenue in Diamond’s chapter 7 case, including a payment waterfall regarding litigation against Alliance Entertainment.

The Trustee believes that the Debtors have viable defenses to the Alliance claims and that the estates have viable, significant claims against Alliance. The Trustee believes that the potential recovery for the Debtors’ bankruptcy estates in the Alliance Litigation could be significant.

That litigation involves counterclaims seeking $30 million on damages from Alliance as well as the release of $8 million deposit that’s currently in escrow.

In the Alliance Litigation, the Debtors asserted, (and the Trustee intends to pursue), counterclaims seeking approximately $30 million on damages from Alliance, which include the release to the estates of an $8 million deposit in escrow. Given the complexity, scope, and potential value of the Alliance litigation, the Trustee proposes to retain, subject to Court approval, Kramon & Graham, P.A. (“K&G”), specifically attorneys Jean Lewis and David Shuster, as special litigation counsel to prosecute the estates’ claims in the Alliance Litigation.

Alliance Entertainment has submitted an objection to Fisher’s motion.

Alliance states Fisher’s motion is “devoid of any case law supporting the proposed financings under the circumstances of this case. The Motion relies entirely on conclusory statements. The Trustee does not even suggest he considered any other source of financing.” They further state that the motion skips steps of section 364 of the Bankruptcy Code in the lending request.

It also highlights that Fisher’s motion for the lending relies primarily on litigation claims. It’s not “presented as bridge financing to preserve a going concern, but as a vehicle to fund speculative litigation while expanding the secured lender’s priming position and superpriority status.” Basically, the funding is all about the litigation which might not succeed. There isn’t a “demonstrable benefit” to Diamond and is just “speculative.”

Alliance closes that the proposed financing benefits JPMorgan at the expense of the estates. The litigation proceeds are subject to JPMorgan’s liens, there’s JPMorgan’s superiority claims, and that any wins from the cases prioritizes JPMorgan. Diamond still owes the bank nearly $7 million. In other words, it’s a loan to pay back JPMorgan and not much else.

You can read Alliance Entertainment’s full motion below.

Diving into Diamond Trustee Morgan W. Fisher’s Debtor Financing Motion

Yesterday, we kicked off going over a flurry of filings concerning Diamond‘s chapter 7 case. The first we went over was a surface level look at trustee Morgan W. Fisher‘s motion for new financing from JPMorgan Chase Bank. JPMorgan Chase Bank was the bank originally providing the “debtor in possession” financing during Diamond’s chapter 11, in short providing a loan that allowed them to operate through the process.

Fisher is asking the court to enter a new DIP credit agreement. There’s some interesting nuggets from the motion. Here’s some highlights:

WHEREAS, all obligations of the Debtors under the DIP Loan Documents became automatically due and payable in full on the Maturity Date of December 29, 2025. The Debtors’ failure to pay such obligations in full resulted in Events of Defaults under the DIP Loan Documents.

WHEREAS, on March 10, 2026, the DIP Lender filed its proof of claim No. 27 asserting its rights, claims, liens and interests under the DIP Loan Documents and the Final DIP Order (the “JPMorgan Proof of Claim”). In the JPMorgan Proof of Claim, the DIP Lender asserts the current outstanding amount owing from the Debtors to the DIP Lender under the DIP Loan Documents is not less than $6,579,473.92 in the aggregate, with interest, costs and attorneys’ fees continuing to accrue, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Final DIP Order and the DIP Loan Documents.

Technical Amendments of Final DIP Order and DIP Credit Agreement and Reinstatement of DIP Credit Agreement. The DIP Credit Agreement is reinstated, effective upon the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of this Stipulation. The Maturity Date under the DIP Credit Agreement is extended through and including June 30, 2027. The Maximum DIP Facility Amount is increased to and including $8,200,000. All references in the Final DIP Order, the DIP Credit Agreement and the DIP Loan Documents to the Debtors/Borrowers shall be deemed amended to include the Trustee as the authorized Borrower under the DIP Credit Agreement. Following return of the Letter of Credit (as defined in the Final DIP Order), the DIP Lender is authorized to draw and apply the funds securing the Letter of Credit to the outstanding indebtedness under the DIP Credit Agreement without further order of the Court.

The Trustee Borrowings are capped at $766,000.00 in new advances, plus such further uses of cash collateral as are authorized under the Stipulation, not to exceed the Maximum DIP Amount of $8,200,000 (“Trustee Borrowing Cap”).

While the need for more money for the chapter 7 process is news enough. The full filing goes deep into the reality of where things stand as well as where Fisher thinks there’s money to be gained in the chapter 7 process.

The Trustee currently has cash on hand of approximately $340,000.00 in his controlled trustee accounts. Additional funds in the approximate amount of $150,000.00 are held in JPMorgan bank accounts that may be subject to competing third party claims and disputes.

Part of the change from a chapter 11 filing to chapter 7 filing for Diamond was concerns that funds were drying up for Diamond to continue to function and JPMorgan not interested in extending a loan. As mentioned above, Diamond still owes JPMorgan $6,579,473.92 from their original DIP agreement. We get a sense of some of where things stand currently for Fisher when it comes to cash on hand. $340,000 is not a lot, especially when one newly hired consultant in the case will cost a minimum of $700,000 for ongoing litigation (more on that later) and the mentioned amount owed by Diamond to JPMorgan alone. We wonder if there’s accounts not “controlled” by the trustee beyond what’s held by JPMorgan. The wording gives me pause and seems very specific.

So, where is the money to pay off these creditors going to come from? Strap in, because there’s a lot laid out here.

Alliance Litigation Payment Waterfall

Fisher has a lot of confidence in litigation involving Alliance Entertainment. Kramon & Graham, P.A. is being proposed as the “Special Litigation Counsel” and focused on the litigation regarding Alliance Entertainment.

The Trustee believes that the Debtors have viable defenses to the Alliance claims and that the estates have viable, significant claims against Alliance. The Trustee believes that the potential recovery for the Debtors’ bankruptcy estates in the Alliance Litigation could be significant.

Kramon & Graham, P.A. will be paid a flat fee of $700,000 and then 25% of the gross recovery exceeding $2.8 million up and above the $700,000. So, if Kramon & Graham got $3 million in the case, they’d get an additional $50,000.

How much are we talking here? How about over $30 million.

In the Alliance Litigation, the Debtors asserted, (and the Trustee intends to pursue), counterclaims seeking approximately $30 million on damages from Alliance, which include the release to the estates of an $8 million deposit in escrow. Given the complexity, scope, and potential value of the Alliance litigation, the Trustee proposes to retain, subject to Court approval, Kramon & Graham, P.A. (“K&G”), specifically attorneys Jean Lewis and David Shuster, as special litigation counsel to prosecute the estates’ claims in the Alliance Litigation.

That’d be $6.1 million for Kramon & Graham, P.A.? We’ll go through the Alliance documentation again and report exactly what the counterclaim damages are (the $8 million is easy to figure out) but the back and forth between Diamond and Alliance Entertainment has gone on for close to a year now and pretty crazy with accusations. Today, new rulings as far as confidentiality and a protective order were dropped. We’ll also be following up on that.

But, if they got that $30 million, who would it go to? Fisher lays that out in his motion which you can see below.

3.1 Alliance Litigation Payment Waterfall. If the Alliance Litigation is concluded and/or Settled in whole or in part, then, the distribution of any Alliance Proceeds remaining after payment of any unpaid portion of the K&G Flat Fee, any amount due to K&G for the K&G Contingency Fee, and any unreimbursed and authorized K&G Expenses shall be made as soon as practicable, and allocated as follows:
(i) First, to repayment of all Trustee Borrowings then outstanding.
(ii) Second, to payment of the Alliance Statutory Trustee Fee;
(iii) Third, to payment of any portion of the Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professionals Retainer, specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan in writing following consultation among and between the Trustee and JPMorgan, and pertaining to services and expenses actually performed and incurred in the Alliance Litigation, and
(iv) Fourth, to JPMorgan to be applied to the amounts outstanding under the Final DIP Order, the DIP Credit Agreement and this Stipulation until JPMorgan has been paid in full;
(v) Fifth, to the Bankruptcy Estate. Any remaining portion of unpaid Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professional Retainer and not specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan shall be paid from this portion of the Alliance Proceeds.

Consignment Litigation Payment Waterfall

The fight over consigned goods has been going on almost as long as the entire chapter 11/chapter 7 case. At the heart of that is the want by Diamond to sell of goods it has in its possession that were provided by publishers. Of course, publishers want their goods back, stating the contracts are no longer valid. All of that is before the court and court of appeals. The amount of goods isn’t quite clear as not all publishers are involved in disputes but we’re talking $10s of millions potentially for Diamond if they sold the inventory (I believe the inventory was over $100 million). But, the longer this dispute continues, the less that the inventory is possibly worth.

The estates also hold significant claims arising from consignment-related disputes. The Consignment Litigation implicates important rights in inventory, proceeds, and other assets that may yield value for the estates. The Trustee has and will continue to pursue the Consignment Litigation.

Below is how that money would be split out if Diamond prevails in court.

3.2 Consignment Litigation Payment Waterfall. If the Consignment Litigation is concluded and/or Settled in whole or in part, then, the distribution of any Consignment Proceeds shall be made as soon as practicable, and allocated as follows:
(i) First, to repayment of all Trustee Borrowings then outstanding.
(ii) Second, to payment of the Consignment Statutory Trustee Fee;
(iii) Third, to payment of any portion of the Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professionals Retainer, specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan in writing following consultation among and between the Trustee, JPMorgan and Shapiro Sher, and pertaining to services and expenses actually performed and incurred in the Consignment Litigation, and;
(iv) Fourth,
(a) Seventy-five percent (75%) of the remaining Consignment Proceeds to JPMorgan (to be applied to the amounts outstanding under the Final DIP Order, the DIP Credit Agreement and this Stipulation until JPMorgan has been paid in
full;
(b) Twenty-five percent (25%) of the remaining Consignment Proceeds to the Bankruptcy Estate. Any remaining portion of unpaid Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professional Retainer and not specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan shall be paid from this portion of the Consignment Proceeds.

Avoidance Litigation Payment Waterfall

This one is fascinating. Avoidance Litigation Payment is basically going over money previously paid out to make sure it passes the smell test.

The Debtors’ SOFAs indicate 90-day transfers in the aggregate amount of approximately $67 million, and approximately $12 million in 1-year insider transfers. While the Trustee must perform a proper preference analysis to make final determinations as to Avoidance Actions that are worth pursuing (it does not appear that any pre-conversion estate professional performed any comprehensive preference analysis), the Trustee anticipates the possibility of significant preference recoveries

Sounds like something might not have been kosher this past year? Due diligence is great but “anticipates the possibility of significant preference recoveries” sounds like something is up. There might be even more drama coming down the pipeline!

And here’s that payment plan if this is successful.

3.3 Avoidance Litigation Payment Waterfall. If any Avoidance Litigation is concluded and/or Settled in whole or in part, then, the distribution of any Avoidance Proceeds shall be made as soon as practicable, and allocated as follows:
(i) First, to repayment of all Trustee Borrowings then outstanding.
(ii) Second, to payment of the Avoidance Statutory Trustee Fee;
(iii) Third, to payment of any portion of the Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professionals Retainer, specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan in writing following consultation among and between the Trustee, JPMorgan and Shapiro Sher, and pertaining to services and expenses actually performed and incurred in the Avoidance Litigation, and;
(iv) Fourth,
(a) Seventy-five percent (75%) of the remaining Avoidance Proceeds to JPMorgan (to be applied to the amounts outstanding under the Final DIP Order, the DIP Credit Agreement and this Stipulation until JPMorgan has been paid in full;
(b) Twenty-five percent (25%) of the remaining Avoidance Proceeds to the Bankruptcy Estate. Any remaining portion of unpaid Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professional Retainer and not specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan shall be paid from this portion of the Avoidance Proceeds.

That’s Fisher’s plan laid out, a three pronged approach to get as much money as possible to pay back creditors… how much to the actual publishers is a whole other thing.

None of this is guaranteed and interested parties have time to object to any of this as well as the recent proposals to add additional staff.

Diamond Trustee Morgan W. Fisher asks Court to approve Debtor Financing

There were a flurry of filings today concerning Diamond‘s chapter 7 process and we’ll get to them all, but the most interesting (so far) is a motion to approve financing from JPMorgan Chase Bank.

JPMorgan Chase Bank was the bank that had originally done “debtor in possession” financing during Diamond’s chapter 11, in short providing a loan that allowed them to operate through the process. Most of that is paid off, we’ll get to that below, but there’s a need to pay for the current chapter 7.

Fisher is asking the court to enter a new DIP credit agreement. There’s some interesting nuggets from the motion. Here’s some highlights:

WHEREAS, all obligations of the Debtors under the DIP Loan Documents became automatically due and payable in full on the Maturity Date of December 29, 2025. The Debtors’ failure to pay such obligations in full resulted in Events of Defaults under the DIP Loan Documents.

WHEREAS, on March 10, 2026, the DIP Lender filed its proof of claim No. 27 asserting its rights, claims, liens and interests under the DIP Loan Documents and the Final DIP Order (the “JPMorgan Proof of Claim”). In the JPMorgan Proof of Claim, the DIP Lender asserts the current outstanding amount owing from the Debtors to the DIP Lender under the DIP Loan Documents is not less than $6,579,473.92 in the aggregate, with interest, costs and attorneys’ fees continuing to accrue, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Final DIP Order and the DIP Loan Documents.

Technical Amendments of Final DIP Order and DIP Credit Agreement and Reinstatement of DIP Credit Agreement. The DIP Credit Agreement is reinstated, effective upon the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of this Stipulation. The Maturity Date under the DIP Credit Agreement is extended through and including June 30, 2027. The Maximum DIP Facility Amount is increased to and including $8,200,000. All references in the Final DIP Order, the DIP Credit Agreement and the DIP Loan Documents to the Debtors/Borrowers shall be deemed amended to include the Trustee as the authorized Borrower under the DIP Credit Agreement. Following return of the Letter of Credit (as defined in the Final DIP Order), the DIP Lender is authorized to draw and apply the funds securing the Letter of Credit to the outstanding indebtedness under the DIP Credit Agreement without further order of the Court.

But most interesting is laying out the various litigation going on and how any proceeds will be paid out:

3.1 Alliance Litigation Payment Waterfall. If the Alliance Litigation is concluded and/or Settled in whole or in part, then, the distribution of any Alliance Proceeds remaining after payment of any unpaid portion of the K&G Flat Fee, any amount due to K&G for the K&G Contingency Fee, and any unreimbursed and authorized K&G Expenses shall be made as soon as practicable, and allocated as follows:
(i) First, to repayment of all Trustee Borrowings then outstanding.
(ii) Second, to payment of the Alliance Statutory Trustee Fee;
(iii) Third, to payment of any portion of the Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professionals Retainer, specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan in writing following consultation among and between the Trustee and JPMorgan, and pertaining to services and expenses actually performed and incurred in the Alliance Litigation, and
(iv) Fourth, to JPMorgan to be applied to the amounts outstanding under the Final DIP Order, the DIP Credit Agreement and this Stipulation until JPMorgan has been paid in full;
(v) Fifth, to the Bankruptcy Estate. Any remaining portion of unpaid Trustee’s
Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professional Retainer and not specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan shall be paid from this portion of the Alliance Proceeds.

3.2 Consignment Litigation Payment Waterfall. If the Consignment Litigation is concluded and/or Settled in whole or in part, then, the distribution of any Consignment Proceeds shall be made as soon as practicable, and allocated as follows:
(i) First, to repayment of all Trustee Borrowings then outstanding.
(ii) Second, to payment of the Consignment Statutory Trustee Fee;
(iii) Third, to payment of any portion of the Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professionals Retainer, specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan in writing following consultation among and between the Trustee, JPMorgan and Shapiro Sher, and pertaining to services and expenses actually performed and incurred in the Consignment Litigation, and;
(iv) Fourth,
(a) Seventy-five percent (75%) of the remaining Consignment Proceeds to JPMorgan (to be applied to the amounts outstanding under the Final DIP Order, the DIP Credit Agreement and this Stipulation until JPMorgan has been paid in
full;
(b) Twenty-five percent (25%) of the remaining Consignment Proceeds to the Bankruptcy Estate. Any remaining portion of unpaid Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professional Retainer and not specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan shall be paid from this portion of the Consignment Proceeds.

3.3 Avoidance Litigation Payment Waterfall. If any Avoidance Litigation is concluded and/or Settled in whole or in part, then, the distribution of any Avoidance Proceeds shall be made as soon as practicable, and allocated as follows:
(i) First, to repayment of all Trustee Borrowings then outstanding.
(ii) Second, to payment of the Avoidance Statutory Trustee Fee;
(iii) Third, to payment of any portion of the Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professionals Retainer, specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan in writing following consultation among and between the Trustee, JPMorgan and Shapiro Sher, and pertaining to services and expenses actually performed and incurred in the Avoidance Litigation, and;
(iv) Fourth,
(a) Seventy-five percent (75%) of the remaining Avoidance Proceeds to JPMorgan (to be applied to the amounts outstanding under the Final DIP Order, the DIP Credit Agreement and this Stipulation until JPMorgan has been paid in full;
(b) Twenty-five percent (25%) of the remaining Avoidance Proceeds to the Bankruptcy Estate. Any remaining portion of unpaid Trustee’s Professional Fees in excess of the Trustee’s Professional Retainer and not specifically approved and authorized by JPMorgan shall be paid from this portion of the Avoidance Proceeds.

Also of note is the mention of hiring Kramon & Graham, P.A focusing on litigation involving Alliance Entertainment, guaranteeing them a minimum of $700,000 from the bankruptcy estate as well as a contingency fee of 25% of any gross recovery exceeding $2.8 million minus the guaranteed $700,000. We’ll have more on them and all of the other motions to bring on new teams to the process in another post.

That’s a lot of money going to the individuals managing the process as well as the banks loaning money, potentially not leaving a whole lot for the publishers owed, and amount that still seems to be up in the air. But, none of this is guaranteed and we’ll see if any objections are filed to this and other motions filed today.

Stay tuned, we’ll have a lot more analysis tomorrow from this filing and more.

JPMorgan Submits a Limited Objection to Recent Consignment Stock Motions

In February, the motion to extend time to “assume or reject executory contracts related to consigned goods” was denied by the court in regards to Diamond‘s chapter 11/chapter 7 process. This concerned the ongoing question regarding contracts between (old) Diamond and publishers handling consigned goods. Who “owns” those goods is a contentious issue with publishers wanting their product back while Diamond, and now their Trustee, want to be able to sell the consigned goods to pay back creditors.

The denial of the motion by the Trustee has caused a chain of rejections. Because the contracts were not assumed or rejected by the deadline, publishers have pounced citing law that saws the contracts default to rejected. You can read about that here and here. Because the contracts are rejected, there’s laid out steps in the contracts as to what happens to consigned goods, primarily the publishers can get them back for the cost of shipping. Sparkle Pop also filed a response as well as Boom Entertainment.

Now, JPMorgan Chase Bank has filed their thoughts as they’re the lender to (old) Diamond.

They bank has filed a limited objection, supporting a “consensual resolution that avoids unnecessary litigation” as long as that protects JPMorgan’s rights and interests including its DIP liens and protections under the Final DIP Order.

It does object to the publishers’ various motions to end the adversary proceedings between (old) Diamond and them and get a decision from the court regarding the court without those adversary proceedings continuing.

JPMorgan goes back to using early arguments that non of the publishers filed a UCC-1 financing statement that’d have protected them during (old) Diamond’ chapter 11. That ignores that the contract between Boom Entertainment and (old) Diamond ended in December 2024, before Diamond’s chapter 11 filing.

JPMorgan is requesting the court deny the various motions by the publishers concerning the consigned goods, allow the Trustee’s appeal regarding the consigned goods be resolved, and make sure JPMorgan’s interests are acknowledged in any decisions made.

Diamond vs. Publishers Heads into 2027

We brought the news in early March that there was some movement in the court case between Diamond and numerous publishers. The various parties and Diamond met on February 26 and March 3-4 in an attempt to find a resolution, the nature of the claims and defenses, to arrange disclosures, and propose a discovery plan. On March 4, there was a filing hashing out the plan for discovery, the process where documents pertaining to the case are handed over.

The issue is who owns the consigned goods that are still being held by Diamond. Ablaze, Battle Quest Comics, American Mythology Productions, Action Lab Entertainment, BOOM! Entertainment, and Fantagraphics are all fighting to get their inventory back. Diamond wants to keep the inventory to be able to sell it off to pay creditors. JPMorgan Chase Bank wants Diamond to sell off the inventory so it can get paid back by Diamond. Sparkle Pop is involved because it has sold off some of the inventory when it wasn’t supposed to and currently is holding the physical product in a warehouse it controls.

We said in our recent reporting that the earliest the trial would happen is November but likely December due to holidays. Well, we were off, because there is now a “hearing on dispositive motions” is set for January 27, 2027. That’s a hearing that asks the court for a ruling before a trial begins. The trial is expected to last 3 to 4 days.

How recent moves to have Diamond’s claims over the consigned inventory dismissed by other publishers, as well as the Trustee’s proposed deal with Sparkle Pop to sell the consigned goods impacts this is unknown… but get settled, because this could go for quite a while.

Fellow is an example of one of the orders released today.

Update: JPMorgan and Sparkle Pop’s Time to Respond to Questions over their Interest in Diamond Inventory Extended

The Diamond chapter 11 process is now chapter 7 and with that, it creates a ripple across numerous related lawsuits. One such group of lawsuits involves JPMorgan‘s “Validity, Priority or Extent of a Lien or Other Interest in Property.” In question is inventory that Diamond has that is consignment goods provided by publishers. The goods are being held in a warehouse controlled by Sparkle Pop. It is before the court as to figure out who actually owns the inventory. Does Diamond, who can then sell it and pay back its creditors, like JPMorgan? Also, what claim does JPMorgan have as far as the inventory since the inventory was used as collateral by Diamond to get a loan?

The question concerns multiple lawsuits spanning multiple publishers with all of the various court documents similar. JPMorgan now has until February 16, 2026 to respond to this.

Update: Sparkle Pop‘s time to respond to the same complaint has also been extended to February 16. The order is below.

Original complaint example:

Diamond Chapter 11 Lawsuit Sidequests Get Delayed Due to Chapter 7

Diamond‘s chapter 11 case turned into chapter 7 at the end of 2025 and is now moving ahead with the appointment of individuals to manage the process. A question has been out there, how does that impact the numerous lawsuits that have spun out of the chapter 11. There’s lawsuits concerning inventory that (old) Diamond claims it has a right to but is being managed by (new) Diamond, aka Sparkle Pop, and of course (old) Diamond’s loan lender JPMorgan Chase Bank wants their money, so they have a claim too. It’s a lot to keep track of, dozens of separate cases at this point with most being rather quiet but every so often dust gets kicked up. Today was one of those days.

So far today, BOOM! Entertainment, Living the Line, Herman & Greer, Green Ronin Publishing, Fantagraphics, Ablaze, Zenescope, Action Lab Entertainment, American Mythology, Avatar Press, Battle Quest Comics, and Paizo Inc. all have had stipulations released delaying action in their cases.

Each are fighting over that “consignment stock” and the stipulations extend the time for responses. In October, Diamond launched cases against individual publishers over that stock.

In December, Diamond’s chapter 11 was converted to chapter 7 with a stay in place until February 16, 2026.

So, when it comes to all of these side lawsuits and fights, responses are now delayed until that date, February 16. So, whatever comes next, we have a month before we’ll find out.

Diamond’s lender JPMorgan Chase has a Limited Objection and Reserves Rights Concerning Diamond’s Consignment Plan

JPMorgan Chase

Publishers have been filing objections to Diamond Comic Distributor‘s motion that would allow them to sell, liquidate, dispose of, inventory it currently still hasMany publishers have already been vocal about the motion and many have responded to our inquiries with “no comment” because it’s an ongoing legal matter. So far, TwoMorrows Publishing, Magma Comix, and Graphitti DesignsAbstract StudioNBMWilliam M. Gaines, Agent, Inc.Humanoids, a joint filing by 13 publishersGAMA, the Ad Hoc Committee of Consignors, and Cryptozoic Entertainment have each filed objections to the motion. Now, Diamond’s bank lender JPMorgan Chase is getting in on the action with a “limited objection” and “reservation of rights.”

JPMorgan Chase Bank is Diamond Comic Distributor’s lender, having loaned out money to keep them operating through the chapter 11 process. The maturity of that is August 23, 2025 currently.

JPMorgan Chase in their motion through “reservation of rights,” stand that they need to be paid first. So, any money from the consignment sale should go towards JPMorgan Chase to pay off the loans and then publishers or anyone would come second. They also want to be able to object to “any Consignment Sale that is legally or factually insufficient or impermissible, proposed in derogation of Lender’s consultation rights, not proposed in good faith, or violative of the terms of the Final DIP Order or applicable law.” In short, they want to get paid, and need to get it all paid, and if they’re not first, they’re going to object to it. If the court or anyone attempts to mess with that… objection!

In short, JPMorgan Chase has planted a flag for the future when it comes to decision concerning Diamond’s consignment motion.

Court Approves Diamond’s Fifth Stipulation with JPMorgan Chase Extending the Maturity Date

Diamond Comic Distributors

During Diamond‘s Chapter 11, they have taken a line of credit from JPMorgan Chase to keep the lights on, known as a DIP (Debtors in Possession) Credit Agreement. This agreement has been changed and amended multiple times so far with the “fifth stipulation” now approved by the court.

This matters because it impacts what Diamond owes to whom and when it has to be paid back. It tends to be that banks are one of the first to get paid back in bankruptcy cases, so what agreements with banks matter to the creditors that Diamond owes.

This order extends the Maturity Date of the borrowing through the wind-down of the chapter 11 case. That provision now reads:

means, at the election of the DIP Lender, the earliest to occur of: (a) the date on which the DIP Lender provides, via electronic or overnight mail, written notice to counsel for the Debtors and counsel for the Committee of the occurrence and continuance of an Event of Default; (b) the effective date of an Approved Plan; (c) the filing of any chapter 11 plan other than an Approved Plan by the Debtors or any party in interest; unless such plan contemplates the indefeasible payment in full in cash of the Aggregate Credit Obligations; (d) the date that the Bankruptcy Court orders (x) the conversion of the Chapter 11 Cases to Chapter 7 liquidations, or (y) a dismissal of the Chapter 11 Cases; or (e) August 23, 2025.

Previous changes have impacted the maturity date as well as the amount. While these types of story aren’t exciting, they do mean a lot as Diamond has yet to come up with its plan to pay back its creditors (aka comic and publishers among others) and its recent announcement to liquidate stock it has on consignment to raise money.

« Older Entries