Overview
Robert Stearn Jr. “is an exceptional litigator; his ability to argue in court is a masterclass” (Chambers USA).
“An outstanding litigator with a huge wealth of experience” (Chambers USA, 2024), Bob focuses his bankruptcy litigation practice on preference and fraudulent transfer litigation as well as all types of contested matters. “He is an invaluable resource in disputed matters” (Chambers USA, 2024). Bob’s clients, including large corporate debtors as well as defendants, report that he is “knowledgeable, hard-working, extraordinarily thorough, an excellent oral advocate, and a pleasure to work with” (Chambers USA).
Bob spent his first 10 years of practice in the firm’s Corporate Department and has substantial experience litigating corporate issues such as D&O liability. He also handles commercial disputes in the Delaware state and district courts.
PRACTICES
Select Experience
- Advanced Marketing Services: Provided variety of litigation services to this debtor, including obtaining approval of management incentive plans, motion practice to compel performance by asset purchaser under asset purchase agreement, and commencing litigation for breach of contract and related claims against major vendor
- Advent Venture Partners: Defense of fraudulent transfer litigation arising out of purchase of business
- Allied Holdings: Provided variety of litigation services to this debtor arising out of disputes with first lien lenders and committee
- American Airlines: Defense of $17m preference and fraudulent transfer action
- Bank of New York: Represented lender in successful appeal of bankruptcy court ruling denying claim
- Barclays Capital: Defense of $1.5m preference and fraudulent transfer action
- Clearwire: Defense of Rule 2004 motion
- Crowe Horwath: Defense of Rule 2004 litigation
- De La Rue plc: Defense of $20m fraudulent transfer action
- Dechert: Defense of former debtors’ counsel in malpractice action
- Goldman Sachs: Defense of $5m and $2.5m preference and fraudulent transfer actions
- Grupo American Industries: Defense of $5m preference action
- Horsehead Holding: Lead trial counsel for equity committee opposing plan confirmation
- Houlihan Lokey: Advice concerning solvency analyses
- Linens ‘n Things, Inc.: Provided variety of litigation services to this debtor, including defense of Rule 2004 motion, enforcement of automatic stay, evaluating and commencing multiple preference actions, and defense of challenges to use of cash collateral
- John Martillo: Defense of $50m fraudulent transfer action brought against former president and 50% shareholder
- Micron Semiconductor: Defense of $14m preference and fraudulent transfer action
- Motor Coach Industries: Commenced litigation on behalf of this debtor and obtained temporary restraining order to prevent loss of exit financing
- National Financial Services: Defense of claims asserted in adversary proceeding seeking approx. $100m in damages
- New Century Financial: Provided variety of litigation services to this debtor, including obtaining approval of management incentive plans, defense of litigation concerning deferred compensation plans, and defense of WARN action
- Reliant Energy Channelview: Provided variety of litigation services to this debtor, including litigation to exclude certain contracts from asset sale, litigation with stalking horse bidder, and litigation with asset purchaser
- University of Pennsylvania Law School, J.D., 1990
Order of the Coif - Dickinson College, B.S., magna cum laude, 1985
Education
Publications
State Attorney-Client Privilege Rule Incorporated into Federal Law
Law Journal Newsletters | September 2018
Because state law applies at the time a transaction is negotiated, the parties might assume — reasonably so — that state privilege law will govern communications with their attorneys and financial professionals. But what happens if, years later, a suit is filed in federal court and brings claims under federal law? Does state privilege law still…
State Attorney-Client Privilege Incorporated Into Federal Law
The Bankruptcy Strategist | July 2018
Fraudulent transfer plaintiffsfrequently challenge transactionsthat they say contributed tothe company’s insolvency: leveragedbuyouts, cash-out mergers,share redemptions or othermajor transactions where thecompany parts with assets orincurs liabilities. State law (oftenDelaware law) typically governsthese types of transactions,and structuring them usually requiresthe involvement of attorneys,financial professionals andsometimes investment bankers. Because state law applies atthe time the transaction is negotiated,the parties…
Delaware’s Solvency Test: What Is It and Does It Make Sense?
Delaware Journal of Corporate Law | 2011
This article examines the ambiguities in Delaware solvency law and recommends that the Delaware courts clarify the law and adopt uniform solvency tests.
Proving Solvency: Defending Preference and Fraudulent Transfer Litigation
The Business Lawyer | February 2007
Litigating solvency can be a complicated endeavor. This article provides a general road map for proving solvency in the defense of preference and fraudulent transfer litigation. The three common measures of solvency are discussed: the “balance sheet” test; the “unreasonably small capital” test; and the “ability to pay debts” test. The article also provides practical suggestions…
Recognition
- Chambers USA
- The Best Lawyers in America, since 2014; Wilmington, DE Bet-the-Company Litigation Lawyer of the Year, 2025
- Benchmark Litigation
Bar Admissions
- Delaware
- United States District Court, District of Delaware
- United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit