Interesting move by Gramercy.  It won't impact Crystallex or the early Creditors.  They see the writing on the wall.  There probably won't be enough left after the sale of Citgo to fulfill their award and have petitioned the court to change the order and process.

It looks like they are asking the court to put all of the attached judgment Creditors who reached Step Four in 2023 as obtaining their attachments on the same date. Thus, they are arguing that any award money should be distributed to those 2023 Creditors on a pro rata basis.  Seems like a Hail Mary.  

It didn't take long for Contrarian Capital's lawyers to respond by asking the court to reject Gramercy's request.

Gramercy's partial argument:

If the sale proceeds are insufficient to satisfy all attached judgments held by the 2023

Additional Judgment Creditors in full, Movants request that the Court assign an equal priority

date to the 2023 Additional Judgment Creditors, ensuring their pro rata participation in any sale

proceeds. In accordance with the Court’s order, “[i]f it turns out that the sale proceeds are

insufficient to satisfy all judgments in full, creditors with identical priority dates will be treated

equally (e.g., by having their judgments paid at the same pro rata percentage as

one another).”

Good cause exists to modify the July 2023 Order because, as a result of subsequent

developments, applying the current prioritization scheme to the 2023 Additional Judgment

Creditors would not achieve an equitable distribution of proceeds among similarly situated (and

similarly diligent) creditors. Unlike the twelve 2017–2022 Judgment Creditors that filed their

motions over the course of five years, meaningful distinctions cannot be drawn among the 2023

Additional Judgment Creditors based on their relative diligence, and none of them (save

ConocoPhillips, which made early efforts on behalf of its two senior attached judgments)

contributed significantly more than others to the enforcement effort.

And yet, depending on the net proceeds generated by the sale, under the current order, a few

of the 2023 Additional Judgment Creditors will likely reap windfalls while most of the others will

recover nothing due to  the vagaries of judicial and bureaucratic processes entirely beyond their

control.  This is precisely the outcome that the Court sought to avoid. Granting equal priority to

the 2023  Additional Judgment Creditors would comport with Delaware law and equity practice

as well as  the July 2023 Order by (i) rewarding diligence and honoring the first in time, first in

line  principle for the senior 2017–2022 Judgment Creditors, who would be unaffected by any

priority scheme modification proposed by the Movants hereunder, while (ii) achieving a more

equitable distribution among the similarly-situated 2023 Additional Judgment Creditors..."