Karen W. Fries

  1. People /

Karen W. Fries

Karen W. Fries

Partner

  1. People /

Karen W. Fries

Karen W. Fries

Partner

Karen W. Fries

Partner

St. Louis

Partner and Practice Group Leader - Finance Transactions

T: +1 314 259 2635

VcardVcard
Download PDFDownload PDF
Print
Share

Biography

Karen Fries is the Global Co-Leader of Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner’s Corporate and Finance Transactions Department, which represents banks and other financial services entities throughout the U.S., U.K., and Germany.  It is annually ranked as a national leader in merger and acquisition transactions as well as public and private capital issuances in the financial services industry.

Karen  practices primarily in the areas of lender and borrower representation in connection with finance transactions. She represents a number of public and private corporations in finance transactions. Her experience includes negotiation and documentation of secured and unsecured, syndicated and single-lender revolving credit and term loan facilities. She has also represented borrowers in private placements. Karen also has broad restructuring experience including negotiation and documentation of large, syndicated debtor in possession financing transactions, representation of secured and unsecured creditors in various aspects of Chapter 11 cases and negotiation and documentation of out-of-court restructuring transactions.

Karen received a J.D. from Vanderbilt University School of Law in 1989.  She was a member of the Vanderbilt Law Review and the Vanderbilt Chapter of the Order of the Coif.  Karen graduated, cum laude,  from Miami University in Oxford, Ohio in 1986 with a B.S. in Business.

Civic Involvement & Honors

  • The Best Lawyers in America, Banking and Finance Law (2016-2024)

Admissions

  • Illinois, 1990
  • Missouri, 1989
  • United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri

Education

Vanderbilt University, J.D., Order of the Coif, 1989

Miami University, B.S., cum laude, 1986

Experience

Following is a sample of significant engagements:

  • Counsel for administrative agent in connection with $200 million revolving credit agreement for debtor in possession financing
  • Counsel for multi-national borrowers in connection with $605 million secured revolving credit and term loan agreement
  • Counsel for multi-national borrowers in connection with $550 million revolving unsecured revolving credit agreement
  • Counsel for borrower in connection with $100 million secured revolving credit agreement.
  • Counsel for multi-national borrowers in connection with $1 billion secured revolving credit and inventory floorplan financing agreement
  • Counsel for administrative agent in connection with $52 million secured revolving credit, equipment line of credit and term loan agreement (including negotiation of intercreditor and subordination agreements with subordinated debt holders)
  • Counsel for major supplier to distressed manufacturing company in connection with pre-bankruptcy restructuring, negotiation of creditor protections in connection with debtor in possession financing provided by new investor and in connection with negotiation of plan of reorganization and related exit financing
  • Counsel for multi-national borrowers in connection with $450 million revolving credit agreement
  • Counsel to borrower in connection with $850 million revolving credit agreement
  • Counsel to borrower in connection with revolving credit, term and subordinated financing for sale of closely-held business to an employee stock ownership trust
  • Counsel to sellers in connection with multiple purchase agreements for the sale of accounts receivable
  • Issuance (for borrowers) and review (for lenders) of bankruptcy-related opinions (substantive consolidation and true sale) in connection with complex financing transactions

Related Insights

Insights
Jan 06, 2023

BCLP Israel Deal Round-up 2022

Insights
Aug 24, 2022

Deceptive and unfair -- multiple NSF fees on representments of the same transaction

In guidance issued recently, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) advised that charging multiple non-sufficient funds (“NSF”) fees constitute “violations of law” when customer disclosures do not fully and clearly explain that the same unpaid transaction might result in multiple NSF fees if an item is presented more than once.[1] Supervisory Guidance on Multiple Re-Presentment NSF Fees, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Financial Institutions Letter, August 18, 2022.
Insights
Aug 19, 2022

CFPB guidance on pay-to-pay fees impacts consumer loan agreements

Consumer debt collectors may not be permitted to charge consumers “convenience fees” for card payments, which the Consumer Financial Protection Board (the “CFPB”) calls “pay-to-pay” fees, unless the underlying loan agreement expressly provides that such fees may be charged. Such language may also lessen exposure to UDAAP enforcement. Consumer lenders may want to review their loan agreements as a result of a recent Advisory Opinion[1] issued by the CFPB and determine whether additional language would enhance the ability of debt collectors to charge convenience fees for card payments. Debt collectors may want to determine whether the existing loan agreements they are seeking to enforce are sufficiently worded to support charging convenience fees to consumer debtors from whom they collecting payments on defaulted loans.

Related Insights

Awards
Aug 17, 2023
The Best Lawyers in America® 2024
News
Jan 26, 2023
BCLP advises Capacity in acquisition of Textel CX Inc.
News
Jan 23, 2023
BCLP advises Benson Hill on divestiture of its fresh foods segment
Insights
Jan 06, 2023
BCLP Israel Deal Round-up 2022
Insights
Aug 24, 2022
Deceptive and unfair -- multiple NSF fees on representments of the same transaction
In guidance issued recently, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) advised that charging multiple non-sufficient funds (“NSF”) fees constitute “violations of law” when customer disclosures do not fully and clearly explain that the same unpaid transaction might result in multiple NSF fees if an item is presented more than once.[1] Supervisory Guidance on Multiple Re-Presentment NSF Fees, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Financial Institutions Letter, August 18, 2022.
Insights
Aug 19, 2022
CFPB guidance on pay-to-pay fees impacts consumer loan agreements
Consumer debt collectors may not be permitted to charge consumers “convenience fees” for card payments, which the Consumer Financial Protection Board (the “CFPB”) calls “pay-to-pay” fees, unless the underlying loan agreement expressly provides that such fees may be charged. Such language may also lessen exposure to UDAAP enforcement. Consumer lenders may want to review their loan agreements as a result of a recent Advisory Opinion[1] issued by the CFPB and determine whether additional language would enhance the ability of debt collectors to charge convenience fees for card payments. Debt collectors may want to determine whether the existing loan agreements they are seeking to enforce are sufficiently worded to support charging convenience fees to consumer debtors from whom they collecting payments on defaulted loans.
Awards
Aug 18, 2022
The Best Lawyers in America© 2023
Awards
Aug 19, 2021
The Best Lawyers in America© 2022
Awards
Aug 20, 2020
The Best Lawyers in America© 2021