Digital Commons Network^™

When Deciding Whether To Transfer Venue, Bankruptcy Courts Will Consider Their Discretion To Retain A Case, As Well As The Interests Of Justice And Convenience Of The Parties, Cole Eiber

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

When a debtor decides to file a petition for bankruptcy, one decision to make is in what court, or what jurisdiction to file. However, the debtor’s choice of where to file is not always indisputable. Once a case is filed in a particular court, any “party in interest” may bring a motion seeking to change the venue of the case to an alternate court. Additionally, a court, on its own motion, may transfer a case to an alternate venue. The three statutory provisions that govern transfers of venue are Bankruptcy Rule 1014 (“Rule 1014”), 28 U.S.C. § 1408 (“Section …

Express Preclusion Of The Federal Arbitration Act For All Bankruptcy-Related Matters, John R. Hardison

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

This Article sets forth a more solid justification for bankruptcy courts to refuse to order arbitration of any matter related to and affecting a bankruptcy case through express preclusion. First, this Article describes the historical development of the Supreme Court’s holdings on preclusion of the FAA in general and on the courts of appeals’ current formulation of a bankruptcy exception to the FAA. Next, this Article discusses the statutory, historical, and policy-based support for reading the bankruptcy jurisdictional provisions as creating an express exception to the FAA, or alternatively as supporting an implied exception to the FAA. As discussed, …

A Bankruptcy Court’S Authority To Find An Implicit Waiver Of A Debtor’S Rights Under A Chapter 11 Reorganization Plan, Benjamin Ranalli

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

In chapter 11 cases, bankruptcy courts often deal with parties seeking reorganization or the approval of a reorganization plan. However, repeated instances of post-confirmation disputes have led courts to address the issue of whether bankruptcy courts retain jurisdiction in disputes that arise after the plan has been confirmed. It is settled that bankruptcy courts retain post-confirmation jurisdiction regarding certain matters in chapter 11 cases. Since reorganization plans are treated like contracts between parties, issues of contract law regularly arise in bankruptcy court in post-confirmation cases. One such issue is whether a bankruptcy court may authorize an implicit waiver of …

Circuit Split As To Whether Rejection Of Power Purchasing Agreements Are Subject To Bankruptcy Court Or Ferc Jurisdiction, Gabriela Zapata

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) enables troubled enterprises to be restructured, so that they can operate successfully in the future. Under section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor in possession may reject a contract subject to bankruptcy court approval. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”), however, has “exclusive jurisdiction” over the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce, including power purchase agreements (“PPAs”). Accordingly, there is a dispute as to whether the rejection of a PPA is subject to bankruptcy court or FERC approval.

This memorandum addresses how courts have …

Claim Preclusion And The Problem Of Fictional Consent, Lindsey Simon

Scholarly Works

The doctrine of claim preclusion promotes fairness and finality by preventing parties from raising claims that already were (or could have been) raised in a prior proceeding. This strict consequence can be imposed only when the litigant received minimal due process protections in the initial proceeding, including notice and direct or indirect participation.

Modern litigation has caused a new problem. In some cases, a party may be precluded from ever raising a claim on the grounds of “fictional consent” to a prior court’s decisionmaking authority. Litigation devices have expanded the potential reach of judgments through aggregation and broad jurisdictional grants, …

Venezuela Undermines Gold Miner Crystallex's Attempts To Recover On Its Icsid Award, Sam Wesson

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Stern Claims And Article Iii Adjudication - The Bankruptcy Judge Knows Best, Laura B. Bartell

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.

Filing A Proof Of Claim In A Bankruptcy Court Subjects The Filing Party To The Court’S Jurisdiction. Anti-Waiver Clauses In The Proof Of Claim Are Not The Same Thing As Objecting To Jurisdiction, Christina Buru

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

In the United States, a federal court must have both personal and subject-matter jurisdiction to hear and rule on a case. Subject-matter jurisdiction can be met by satisfying the requirements under §1331 or §1332 of title 28 of the United States Code. These are typically referred to as “federal question” jurisdiction and “diversity” jurisdiction. §1331(a) allows district courts to exercise original jurisdiction over “civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States”. §1332(a) allows district courts to exercise original jurisdiction over civil actions “where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000…and …

Selling A Vessel Free And Clear Of A Maritime Lien Pursuant To Section 363 Of The Bankruptcy Code, Aram Movaseghi

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Under title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”), a debtor in possession or trustee may sell property of the debtor’s estate. However, a lien on a maritime vessel may make such a sale challenging, in particular because of jurisdictional issues. When a debtor’s assets become subject to the jurisdiction of both admiralty and bankruptcy cases, a complex conundrum arises. Maritime bankruptcies have generated complex legal issues and jurisdictional conflicts that have perplexed practitioners and implicated significant constitutional issues.

Under section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor or trustee may seek authority from the court to …

Foreign Judgments In Florida Bankruptcy Courts: Choice Of Law, Statutes Of Limitations, And Other Unresolved Issues, Michael Raudebaugh

Barry Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Permissibility Of Bringing An Action Against Johns-Manville’S Insurers Despite Injunctive Orders, Amanda Hoffman

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

It is well known that bankruptcy courts have jurisdiction over all of the property of the debtor’s estate, no matter where the estate is located. Bankruptcy courts have the power to preserve that jurisdiction by enjoining proceedings that would remove property from the bankrupt estate. Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) has broadly defined property of the estate as “all legal or equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the commencement of the case.” Section 541(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code has been defined broadly to include “all kinds of property, including tangible or …

What Are The Article Iii Limits To Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction, And Can Parties Consent To Expanded Jurisdiction: Wellness International Network V. Sharif (13-935), Marshall E. Tracht

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Can A Bankruptcy Trustee Recover Assets Transferred To A Self-Settled Trust?, Christian Corkery

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

A “spendthrift trust” provides a fund for the benefit of another, secures it against the beneficiary’s improvidence, and places it beyond the reach of the beneficiary’s creditors. A spendthrift trust has long been recognized as a useful vehicle for providing the beneficiary with the benefits of the trust while simultaneously preventing the beneficiary from voluntarily transferring his interest in the trust. This is particularly useful where the settlor wants to protect the transfer of wealth to a beneficiary. For instance, if a parent makes a large gift to an irresponsible child, the child will likely squander the gift …

Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction After Executive Benefits Insurance Agency V. Arkison, Keith Sharfman, G. Ray Warner

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Bankruptcy law has been struggling for several years now with the so-called "Stern problem”—the jurisdictional cloud of doubt that has been cast by the Supreme Court's decision in Stern v. Marshall over much of the work that bankruptcy courts have done routinely for decades. Since Stern was decided, bankruptcy courts and the litigants who appear before them cannot be confident that it is constitutional for non-Article III bankruptcy judges to adjudicate various matters over which there is clear statutory jurisdiction, such as avoidance actions against third party transferees who are not otherwise involved or participating in the bankruptcy …

The Debtor Class, Kara J. Bruce

Kara J. Bruce

In recent years, individuals seeking bankruptcy protection have encountered an unexpected harm: their lenders have misrepresented the amounts they owe, lost or misapplied their loan payments, and violated clear requirements of bankruptcy law and procedure. Recent investigations of consumer bankruptcy cases reveal widespread abuse of the bankruptcy code, ranging from the filing of unsupported or overinflated proofs of claim to violations of the automatic stay and discharge injunction. Such practices undermine consumer bankruptcy’s central goals to provide consumer debtors a fresh financial start and to achieve the fair treatment of and distribution of assets to creditors. Because many debtors affected …

Meet The New Juvenile And Domestic Relations District Court, Ingrid Michelsen Hillinger

Ingrid Michelsen Hillinger

No abstract provided.

Does Section 329 Grant Exclusive Jurisdiction To Bankruptcy Courts?, Samantha M. Tusa

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Fee agreements between bankruptcy debtors and their counsel must often be settled in court. In which court those fee disputes can be heard is a question that is not yet settled. One court has looked to section 329 of the Bankruptcy Code for the answer. Section 329 states that if the compensation agreed upon by the debtor and attorney exceeds a reasonable value for the services rendered, “the court” may cancel the agreement or return some of the payment. In re Piccinini is the first case to hold that the phrase “the court” in section 329 confers exclusive jurisdiction …

Stern V. Marshall, And The Power Of Bankruptcy Courts To Issue Final Orders On All Compulsory Counterclaims, Ronald D. Rotunda

Ronald D. Rotunda

Article III of the Constitution grants federal district judges, appellate court judges, and Supreme Court Justices important constitutional protections (lifetime tenure and no salary diminution) to guarantee their independence. However, the Supreme Court has allowed Congress to create, under Article I, a different class of judges (called "Article I judges"). These judges (such as tax court and bankruptcy court judges) do not have Article III protection and thus do not share Article III independence. Although we might think of Article I judges as administrative law hearing officers, they do exercise some judge-like powers. The extent of those powers raises fundamental …

A Complete Property Right Amendment, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

The trend of the eminent domain reform and "Kelo plus" initiatives is toward a comprehensive Constitutional property right incorporating the elements of level of review, nature of government action, and extent of compensation. This article contains a draft amendment which reflects these concerns.

Bond Repudiation, Tax Codes, The Appropriations Process And Restitution Post-Eminent Domain Reform, John H. Ryskamp

ExpressO

This brief comment suggests where the anti-eminent domain movement might be heading next.

Breaking The Bank: Revisiting Central Bank Of Denver After Enron And Sarbanes-Oxley, Celia Taylor

ExpressO

No abstract provided.

Can A Bankrupt Company Assign Its Patent License To The Highest Bidder, Even When The License Itself Forbids Assignment? Why Everex Systems, Inc. V. Cadtrak Corp. Gives An Unconvincing Answer, Matthew D. Siegel

ExpressO

A patent licensee that declares bankruptcy will often want to assign its rights under the license to another party in exchange for much-needed cash. The Bankruptcy Code generally allows debtors to assign executory contracts, including patent licenses, in this way. Indeed, the Code permits debtors to assign a contract even if the contract itself contains a “no-assign” clause, i.e., a clause expressly forbidding assignment. But there is an exception: The Code will defer to certain kinds of otherwise applicable non-bankruptcy law that would normally prevent the contract from being assigned. In particular, the Code will not allow assignment by a …

A Brave New Lochner Era? The Constitutionality Of Nafta Chapter 11, Steve Louthan

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

In the eight years since its adoption, NAFTA Chapter 11 has escaped significant scrutiny from academics and journalists alike. However, with the recent filing of several Chapter 11 expropriation claims involving U.S. states, Chapter 11 has begun to gain some notoriety in the press and sparked at least two legal symposia this past year.

This Note begins by highlighting the recent Methanex Chapter 11 claim involving the State of California. Methanex, a Canadian chemical manufacturer and importer, claimed $1.6 billion in damages over California's ban of the chemical MTBE. Despite the EPA'S classification of MTBE as a possible carcinogen and …

Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction And Agency Action: Resolving The Nextwave Of Conflict, Rafael I. Pardo

Scholarship@WashULaw

This Comment criticizes a pair of decisions by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, FCC v. NextWave Personal Communications, Inc. (In re NextWave Personal Communications, Inc.) and In re FCC, which held that a bankruptcy court lacks jurisdiction to determine whether the Federal Communications Commission is stayed from revoking a debtor's licenses. The Comment argues that the Second Circuit interpreted the bankruptcy court's jurisdiction too narrowly because it failed to distinguish properly between an agency's action as a creditor and as a regulator. It concludes that bankruptcy courts and courts of appeals have concurrent jurisdiction to …

On The Nature Of Federal Bankruptcy Jurisdiction: A General Statutory And Constitutional Theory, Ralph Brubaker

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

11 U.S.C. § 505: Does It Allow The Bankruptcy Court To Determine A Third Party's Tax Liability?, Karen Skeens

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Article Iii And The "Related To" Bankruptcy Jurisdiction: A Case Study In Protective Jurisdiction, Thomas C. Galligan, Jr.

Seattle University Law Review

Section II of this paper briefly sets out the jurisdictional scheme of the 1984 Act. Section III presents and describes the argument that the "related to" bankruptcy jurisdiction is unconstitutional. Statements in the legislative history indicate that some legislators believed it would be unconstitutional for a federal court to take jurisdiction in a non-diversity case with Marathon-type state law issues. Several cases have adopted this reasoning and have held that in order for a federal court to have "related to" bankruptcy jurisdiction there must be an independent basis for federal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court cases supporting "related to" jurisdiction are …

The Enterprise Bankruptcy Law Of The People's Republic Of China (For Trial Use): A Translation, Henry R. Zheng

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Art. 1. This law is enacted to meet the need for development of the planned socialist commodity economy and for economic reform, to promote the independence of business management of the enterprises under the ownership by the whole people, to strengthen the system of economic responsibility and democratic management, to improve business management and economic performance, and to protect the lawful rights and interests of debtors and creditors. Art. 2. This law applies to enterprises under the ownership of the whole people.

Art. 3. Enterprises that sustain serious loss due to inappropriate management and that are unable to pay off …

Case Comment, Laura F. Howard

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

SCOPE OF REVIEW IN EXTRADITION PROCEEDINGS: The Government Cannot Appeal A Denial of Extradition Request Based on the Declaratory Judgment Act --United States v. Doherty, 786 F.2d 491 (2d Cir. 1986).

BANKRUPTCY--Section 304 Of The Bankruptcy Code Is Not An Exclusive Remedy In A Nonbankruptcy Court, Cunard Steamship Co.Ltd. v. Salen Reefer Serv. A.B., 773 F.2d 452 (2d Cir. 1985).

The Bankruptcy Reform Act Of 1978–A Review And Comments, Glenn E. Pasvogel Jr.

University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review

No abstract provided.