Law Commons^™

Bad Faith Dismissals In Chapter 7, Myah Drouin

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) provides a fresh start to the “honest but unfortunate debtor.” Chapter 7 therefore permits a debtor to “discharge their outstanding debts in exchange for liquidating their nonexempt assets and distributing them to their creditors.” Dismissals in chapter 7 are governed by section 707 of the Bankruptcy Code. Section 707(a) governs all chapters of bankruptcy filings and applies when adequate “cause” is shown.

There is currently a circuit split regarding whether a debtor’s lack of good faith constitutes cause for dismissal under section 707(a). Under section 707(a), a case may …

Circumstances Under Which A Court Will Dismiss A Chapter 11 Filing Made In Bad Faith, Nicholas Wogan

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Under section 1112(b) of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”), a bankruptcy court may dismiss a Chapter 11 filing “for cause.” It is a generally accepted principle that “for cause” dismissal includes dismissal of filings made in bad faith, and this concept originates in a need for bankruptcy courts to uphold the jurisdictional integrity of the Chapter 11 process from those who would seek to abuse it. Courts deciding whether dismissal for bad faith is warranted typically employ a two-step analysis: first to determine whether a bad faith filing is “cause” for dismissal under section …

Section 1112(B) Of The Bankruptcy Code Allows A Bankruptcy Court To Dismiss A Case Filed In Bad Faith, Antonio Sciarrotta

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

The United States Bankruptcy Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) offers a wide range of instances where a bankruptcy court can dismiss a case. Section 1112(b) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that “the court shall convert a case under this chapter to a case under chapter 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the estate, for cause . . . .” Section 1112(b)(4) lists different scenarios that constitute “for cause.” Although not explicitly within the statutory scheme, a requirement that the debtor files his bankruptcy petition in good faith is one …

Involuntary Bankruptcy Cases And Discretionary “For Cause” Dismissals, Jp Amato

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Exceprt)

This article addresses whether a bankruptcy court has the discretionary power to dismiss an involuntary bankruptcy case filed under chapters 7 or 11 of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) for cause when there is a finding of bad faith or a lack of good faith on behalf of the petitioning creditor or creditors. In short, it is unclear because there is insufficient authority on this issue in the involuntary context, and the issue remains split among the courts in the voluntary context.

This article first addresses the statutory requirements of an involuntary petition. Next, …

A Union's Duty In Bankruptcy Cases To Fairly Represent Its Constituency, Denise Dessel

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Under the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”), a union, as the sole representative of its workers, has a duty to fairly represent them. This duty entitles a union to fairly represent all employees, “whether members of the union or not, fairly.” A union breaches this duty when its conduct or decisions are arbitrary, discriminatory, or committed in bad faith.

The terms “arbitrary,” “discriminatory,” and “bad faith” have been interpreted through case law. Part I of this memorandum discusses the interpretation of arbitrary conduct; Part II addresses how courts have defined discriminatory conduct; and Part III analyzes how bad faith …

Can A Consumer Debtor Voluntarily Dismiss Own Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Case?, Shane P. Walsh

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Under Section 707(a) of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”), a court may dismiss a chapter 7 bankruptcy case for cause. Section 707(a) provides a list of examples of conduct that constitutes cause to guide the court in making its determination. A chapter 7 consumer debtor has the right to voluntarily dismiss his own chapter 7 case, however, that right is not absolute. When a consumer debtor seeks to voluntarily dismiss his chapter 7 case he must establish cause for dismissal under section 707(a). The court will determine whether the debtor’s voluntary motion to dismiss …

Constitutional Bad Faith, David E. Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

The concepts of good faith and bad faith play a central role in many areas of private law and international law. Typically associated with honesty, loyalty, and fair dealing, good faith is said to supply the fundamental principle of every legal system, if not the foundation of all law. With limited exceptions, however, good faith and bad faith go unmentioned in constitutional cases brought by or against government institutions. This doctrinal deficit is especially striking given that the U.S. Constitution twice refers to faithfulness and that insinuations of bad faith pervade constitutional discourse.

This Article investigates these points and their …

Discouraging Frivolous Copyright Infringement Claims: Fee Shifting Under Rule 11 Or 28 U.S.C. § 1927 As An Alternative To Awarding Attorney's Fees Under Section 505 Of The Copyright Act, David E. Shipley

Scholarly Works

The United States Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons resolved a disagreement over when it is appropriate to award attorney’s fees to a prevailing defendant under section 505 of the Copyright Act, and ended a perceived venue advantage for losing plaintiffs in some jurisdictions. The Court ruled unanimously that courts are correct to give substantial weight to the question of whether the losing side had a reasonable case to fight, but that the objective reasonableness of that side’s position does not give rise to a presumption against fee shifting. It made clear that other factors …

Bad Faith At Middle Age: Comments On The Principle Without A Name (Yet), Insurance Law, Contract Law, Specialness, Distinctiveness, And Difference, Robert H. Jerry Ii

Faculty Publications

In this article, Robert Jerry expounds on Professor Abraham's article on insurer liability for bad faith by pointing out that the concept of institutional bad faith is not a new phenomenon, but rather, one that is as old as the insurance industry itself Jerry focuses on Abraham's depiction of the "specialness" and "distinctiveness" of insurance, while exploring additional instances of "rotten to the core" systemic bad faith dating as far back as the nineteenth-century. Much like Abraham did in his article on bad faith, Jerry uses these examples of systemic bad faith to further his assertion that the insurance industry, …

Bad Faith At Middle Age: Comments On “The Principle Without A Name (Yet),” Insurance Law, Contract Law, Specialness, Distinctiveness, And Difference, Robert H. Jerry Ii

UF Law Faculty Publications

In this article, Robert Jerry expounds on Professor Abraham's article on insurer liability for bad faith by pointing out that the concept of institutional bad faith is not a new phenomenon, but rather, one that is as old as the insurance industry itself. Jerry focuses on Abraham's depiction of the "specialness" and "distinctiveness" of insurance, while exploring additional instances of "rotten to the core" systemic bad faith dating as far back as the nineteenth century. Much like Abraham did in his article on bad faith, Jerry uses these examples of systemic bad faith to further his assertion that the insurance …

Good Faith, Bad Faith And The Gulf Between: A Proposal For Consistent Terminology, Steve Coughlan

Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

Since the earliest days of section 24(2) jurisprudence, the phrase “good faith” has been used. For nearly as long, it has been used inconsistently. The same is true, to a lesser extent, of the phrase “bad faith.” This article traces the confusion which arises in understanding and in reasoning from the failure to restrict these phrases to single meanings. The article then proposes particular meanings for each, which would limit their applicability to extreme situations at either end of the spectrum. It is proposed that the term “good faith” should only be used in circumstances where it settles that the …

Deconstructing Lyondell: Reconstructing Revlon, Lawrence Lederman

Articles & Chapters

No abstract provided.

Pooling For Horizontal Wells: Can They Teach An Old Dog New Tricks?, Bruce M. Kramer

Shale Plays in the Intermountain West: Legal and Policy Issues (November 12)

74 pages.

This paper was originally published as:

Bruce M. Kramer, “Pooling for Horizontal Wells: Can They Teach an Old Dog New Tricks?,” 55 Rocky Mt. Min. L. Inst. 8-1, § 8.05 (2009).

Slides: Meaningful Engagement: The Public's Role In Resource Decisions, Mark Squillace

The Future of Natural Resources Law and Policy (Summer Conference, June 6-8)

Presenter: Mark Squillace, Director, Natural Resources Law Center, University of Colorado Law School

22 slides

Ethical Considerations In Land Use Decision Making: 2006 Annual Review Of Cases And Opinions, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

This article reviews reported cases and opinions documenting allegations of unethical conduct involved in land use planning and zoning decision making in 2006.

Ethics In Land Use: Using Ethical Allegations As A Sword Rather Than A Shield, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Using Dispute System Design Methods To Promote Good-Faith Participation In Court-Connected Mediation Programs, John M. Lande

Faculty Publications

This article discusses what can be done to promote productive behavior in mediation and reduce bad conduct. Although most participants do not abuse the mediation process, some people use mediation to drag out litigation, gain leverage for later negotiations, and generally wear down the opposition. Rules requiring good-faith participation are likely to be ineffective and possibly counterproductive. This article proposes using dispute system design principles to develop policies satisfying the interests of stakeholders in court-connected mediation programs. After outlining important interests of key stakeholder groups, including litigants, attorneys, courts, and mediators, the Article describes specific policies that could satisfy their …

The Sounds Of Silence: Waiting For Courts To Acknowledge That Public Policy Justifies Awarding Damages To Third Party Claimants When Liability Insurers Deal With Them In Bad Faith, Francis J. Mootz Iii

Scholarly Works

A long-standing and virtually unchallenged doctrinal rule provides that a liability insurance carrier owes no duties in tort or contract to a third-party claimant who has been injured by its insured. As a matter of doctinal consistency and logic, the traditional rule makes some sense. The liability insurer has no contractual relationship with the claimant, and third-party beneficiary doctrine is not easily used to impose duties. Moreover, by stepping into the shoes of the insured tortfeasor to whom it owes a heightened duty of good faith, the insurer is in an adversarial relationship with the claimant that makes it difficult …

Timeless And Ahead Of Its Time: Lach's V. Fidelity & Casualty Of New York, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

The publication of Judge Keeton's important article “inventing” the reasonable expectations doctrine in 1971 is notable for infusing a good deal of intellectual energy into the study of insurance law, particularly judicial decisions about insurance coverage. Keeton's article, which deduced from cases the principle that courts tended to interpret policies to vindicate the objectively reasonable expectations of the insured, has rightly been viewed as a milestone. It clarified an area of law long seen as inconsistent or result-oriented. It spurred additional important scholarship in the area and elevated insurance caselaw from something of a backwater to at least a respectable …

Crisci V. Security Insurance Co.: The Dawn Of The Modern Era Of Insurance: Bad Faith And Emotional Distress Damages, Jeffrey E. Thomas

Faculty Works

Crisci v. Security Insurance Co. typifies the doctrine of "bad faith," one of the most interesting and important contributions of insurance law to the general body of law. It "typifies" the doctrine with its classic, if somewhat extreme, fact pattern, and with its reliance on the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing for the recognition of a cause of action that sounds in tort. Yet it also represents a potential for bad faith law that has not yet been fulfilled: the promise of emotional distress damages for an insurer's failure to settle.

This article explores both what Crisci …

Faithful Waste, Roger Bernhardt

Publications

This article discusses the interaction of waste and antideficiency statutes in California as to financial waste. The critical inquiry is whether the waste was done in bad faith.

Good Faith: Balancing The Right To Manage With The Right To Represent, Suzanne Darrow-Kleinhaus

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance Law in the years 2000 and 2001.

Equity And Criminal Law, Howard Brill

School of Law Faculty Publications and Presentations

The relationship between courts of equity and the criminal law in Arkansas is laid out by two black letter rules: (1) equity will not enjoin a criminal prosecution, and (2) equity will not enjoin a crime. The basis of both rules is that equity should not intervene in criminal courts, unless no other remedy in the court of law exists. However, the exceptions allowed for each rule are different. Exceptions to the first rule include: cases involving property rights, multiple prosecutions, unlawful exactions, or prosecutions made in bad faith. The second rule allows for an exception when a criminal punishment …

Municipal Ethics Remain A Hot Topic In Litigation: A 1999 Survey Of Issues In Ethics For Municipal Lawyers, Patricia E. Salkin

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Recent Case Developments, Jeffrey W. Stempel

Scholarly Works

Recent case developments in Insurance Law in the years 1999 and 2000.

The Bad News About Good Faith For Excess Um Carriers, Robert L. Tucker

Akron Law Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Three Limitations Of Deliberative Democracy: Identity Politics, Bad Faith, And Indeterminancy, William H. Simon

Faculty Scholarship

In Democracy and Disagreement, Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson elaborate a liberal political style designed to complement the substantive liberalism they and others have developed in recent years. The style they portray is deliberative, and its essence is the appeal to principle.

Race, Angst And Capital Punishment: The Burger Court's Existential Struggle, Katherine R. Kruse

Scholarly Works

This article chronicles the Burger Court's inability to fashion a suitable remedy for racism in the discretionary system of capital sentencing. The article discusses the Court's initial response, “remedial paralysis,” which is evident, not only in McGautha v. California, where the Court refused to find that the Due Process Clause was violated by standardless death sentencing, but also in Furman v. Georgia, where the Court decided to abolish the death penalty. The article further explores the Court's reinstatement of the death penalty, and two of the Court's forays into “bad faith” denial that sustained the death penalty, particularly the Court's …

Judicial Bias, The Insurance Industry And Consumer Protection: An Empirical Analysis Of State Supreme Courts’ Bad-Faith, Breach-Of-Contract, Breach-Of-Covenant-Of-Good-Faith And Excess-Judgment Decisions, 1900–1991, Willy E. Rice

Faculty Articles

Consumers are becoming increasingly dissatisfied with the services and products that the American insurance industry provides. Correspondingly, they are filing an ever-increasing number of lawsuits against insurers in state courts. While courts have ruled equally in favor of insurers and policyholders, advocates for both consumers and the insurance industry strongly believe “judicial bias” or “judicial hostility” permeates state supreme courts.

Some United States Supreme Court Justices have argued that state supreme courts are hostile towards insurance carriers. Commentators have also viciously criticized state supreme courts for being biased against insurance carriers. The contrary view that state supreme courts are anti-consumer …