Jonathan Guy

Senior Counsel

Washington, D.C.

Read full biography at

Jonathan Guy has extensive experience as lead counsel in complex commercial litigation matters in trial and appellate courts throughout the United States. He has represented clients in numerous industries, including finance, commodity trading, energy, real estate, telecommunications, manufacturing and health care.

Chambers USA has variously described Mr. Guy as someone who is a "zealous advocate for his clients," is "valued for his quick and practical advice," "makes fantastically impressive presentations in court," is able to "listen to a large amount of information" in court and "reduce an argument to its essence," and is an "expert in commercial and bankruptcy-related litigation."

Mr. Guy is ranked in Chambers USA as a Senior Statesperson for District of Columbia Bankruptcy/Restructuring and in the Thomson Reuters Washington, D.C. Super Lawyers category for business litigation. He is the former Chair of the Community Responsibility Committee for the Washington, D.C. office and was long active in numerous pro bono cases.

Posts by: Jonathan Guy

Fifth Circuit Holds that Supply Agreement is a “Forward Contract” for Bankruptcy Avoidance Protection

On August 2, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a decision in the bankruptcy case for MBS Management Services, Inc. (the “Debtor”). The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court’s opinion finding that an electric requirements agreement was a “forward contract” and, therefore, that payments made on the agreement were exempt from avoidance under the Bankruptcy Code. Read More.

Tousa Roller Coaster

The bankruptcy case of TOUSA, Inc. and its various subsidiaries (collectively “Tousa”) is one where lenders have seen their fortunes rise and fall. On March 15, 2012, they fell again when the Eleventh Circuit1 (the “Circuit Court”) reversed the District Court’s opinion and reinstated the Bankruptcy Court’s order, which had disgorged over $400 million from Tousa’s senior lenders and avoided certain guarantees and liens granted to them by the Conveying Subsidiaries (defined below). Specifically, the Circuit Court found: (i) the Tousa Bankruptcy Court did not err when it found the Conveying Subsidiaries did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the new liens provided to the New Lenders; and (ii) the Transeastern Lenders were the direct beneficiaries of the new liens and as such subject to the avoidance powers of section 550(a). Read More.

“Caveat Venditor — Ensure Debtor Has Authority To Pay”

(As published in Bankruptcy Law360 on April 20, 2010)

Imagine that you are the head of a major petroleum company that has a sales agreement with a distributor of motor fuel. Under the terms of the agreement, if the distributor wants your products, you are contractually obligated to deliver them. And the sales volume is significant, say $1 million per week. Assume further that the distributor, as is often the case, has pledged all of its personal property, including cash and inventory, to obtain financing. Read More.