Bresler & Schulman Asset Management Corp. (Bevill, Bresler & Schulman Asset Management Corp. v. Spencer Savings & Loan Ass’n), 878 F.2d 742, 751 (3d Cir.1989), in that it clearly includes anything which may be considered a settlement payment. See In re Blanton (Blanton v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.), 105 B.R. 321, 347 (Bankr.E.D.Va.1989) (because margin and settlement payment are “very broadly defined by the Bankruptcy Code,” court accepts the argument that “any payment by [the debtor] which was used to reduce a deficiency in his margin account constituted either a margin or settlement payment for purposes of the exception under § 546(e)”); see also In re Bevill, Bresler & Schulman Asset Management Corp. (Cohen v. Savings Building & Loan Co.), 896 F.2d 54, 61 (3d Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). But cf. In re Edelsberg (Edelsberg v.
holding that transferring securities to a safekeeping account for a purchaser is a settlement payment apparently overruling in re bevill bresler  schulman inc hill v spencer savings  loan assn 94 br 817 82829 dnj1989 holding that accused lawyer violated dishonesty rule by retaining double payment of settlement amount when second settlement check had been sent in error holding that such information is not material under securities law recognizing defense in securities case holding that the term reverse payment is not limited to a cash payment