Bankruptcy Law Commons^™

Applicability Of Discharge Exceptions To Corporate Debtors In Subchapter V: A “Death Blow” To Rescuing Small Businesses, Robert J. Landry Iii

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

On August 23, 2019, the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA) was signed into law, adding a new subchapter to Chapter 11 for small business debtors, i.e. “Subchapter V”. The underlying driver for SBRA was a concern that while most Chapters 11 cases are small business debtors, most small business debtors face difficulty successfully reorganizing under Chapter 11. SBRA is intended to streamline Chapter 11 reorganization for small business debtors by making the process quicker and cheaper. However, SBRA arguably curtailed the scope of discharge when a plan is confirmed without the consent of the creditors for corporate small …

Dol Fiduciary Rule 3.0 Strikeout, Base Knock, Or Home Run?, Antolin Reiber

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Money Is Morphing - Cryptocurrency Can Morph To Be An Environmentally And Financially Sustainable Alternative To Traditional Banking, Clovia Hamilton

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Survey Evidence In Trademark Actions, Ioana Vasiu And Lucian Vasiu

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Corporate Governance And Compelled Speech: Do State-Imposed Board Diversity Mandates Violate Free Speech?, Salar Ghahramani

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Real Persons Are The Corporations We Made Along The Way, Leonard Brahin

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Front Matter

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Two Steps Too Far: New Limitations On The Use Of The Texas Two-Step To Resolve Mass Tort Liability In Bankruptcy, Samuel E. Bartz

University of Miami Business Law Review

This paper explores the mechanisms by which companies have utilized corporate restructuring through divisive mergers in conjunction with the available protections and tools of the United States Bankruptcy Code to resolve mass tort liability without placing the entirety of the business under bankruptcy. Popularized in Texas, a divisive merger is a mechanism by which an existing business entity divides itself into two new entities, allocating all pre-existing assets and liabilities to each as they see fit. Although intended to be a means by which to easily sell assets of a business, it has been more popularly used to resolve mass …

The Poor Man's Problem In Bankruptcy, Rylee Stanley

St. Mary's Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Bankruptcy Law, John T. Laney Iii, Siena Berrios Gaddy, Victoria Barbino Grantham

Mercer Law Review

This Article focuses on bankruptcy opinions issued by the Supreme Court of the United States and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Topics addressed include 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A)’s preclusion of discharge of debts obtained by fraud of a partner or agent; the Supreme Court’s effort to “bring some discipline” to 11 U.S.C. § 363(m) and the use of the term “jurisdictional;” abrogation of tribal sovereign immunity in 11 U.S.C. § 106(a); Chapter 11 plan modification under 11 U.S.C. § 1126 and Bankruptcy Rule 3019(a); the anti‑modification provision of 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2) and its connection …

Mass Tort Bankruptcy Goes Public, William Organek -- Assistant Professor Of Law

Vanderbilt Law Review

Large companies like 3M, Johnson & Johnson, Purdue Pharma, and others have increasingly, and controversially, turned from multidistrict litigation to bankruptcy to resolve their mass tort liability. While corporate attraction to bankruptcy’s unique features partially explains this evolution, this Article reveals an underexamined driver of this trend and its startling results: government intervention. Governments increasingly intervene in high-profile bankruptcies, forcing firms into insolvency and dictating the outcomes in their bankruptcy cases. Using several case studies, this Article demonstrates why bankruptcy law should subject such governmental actions to greater scrutiny and procedural protections. Governments often assume multiple incompatible roles in these …

Symposium Remarks: Public Litigation Values Versus The Endless Quest For Global Peace, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Purdue And Mass Tort Claims: Will Non-Debtor Release Survive?, Christopher M. Alston, Alena Ivanov

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Immunity Through Bankruptcy For The Sackler Family, Daniel G. Aaron, Michael S. Sinha

West Virginia Law Review

In August 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States temporarily blocked one of the largest public health settlements in history: that of Purdue Pharma, L.P., reached in bankruptcy court. The negotiated bankruptcy settlement approved by the court would give a golden parachute, in the form of immunity from liability, to the very people thought to have ignited the opioid crisis: the Sackler family. As the Supreme Court considers the propriety of immunity through bankruptcy, the case has raised fundamental questions about whether bankruptcy is a proper refuge from tort liability and whether law checks power or law serves power. …

Immunity Through Bankruptcy For The Sackler Family, Daniel G. Aaron, Michael S. Sinha

All Faculty Scholarship

In August 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily blocked one of the largest public health settlements in history: that of Purdue Pharma, L.P., reached in bankruptcy court. The negotiated bankruptcy settlement approved by the court would give a golden parachute to the very people thought to have ignited the opioid crisis: the Sackler family. As the Supreme Court considers the propriety of immunity through bankruptcy, the case has raised fundamental questions about whether bankruptcy is a proper refuge from tort liability and whether law checks power or law serves power.

Of course, bankruptcy courts often limit liability against a distressed …

The Mismatched Goals Of Bankruptcy And Mass Tort Litigation, Maureen Carroll

Reviews

By the end of this Term, SCOTUS must decide what to do about the mammoth Purdue Pharma bankruptcy settlement. If allowed to go forward, the $10 billion deal will not only resolve claims against the company, it will shield the Sackler family—the company’s former owners—from any further liability for their role in the opioid crisis. The deal has generated a great deal of discussion, much of it focused on the legality and wisdom of that third-party release. The authors of Against Bankruptcy take a broader view, asking a set of critical questions about the proper role of bankruptcy in the …

In The Midst Of Bankruptcy: How Cryptocurrency's Classification Affects Creditors Who Were Once Customers, Mia Qu

Washington Law Review

In 2022, Congress proposed the Digital Commodities Consumer Protection Act to amend the Commodity Exchange Act and define a new type of commodity: digital commodity. The definition of digital commodity encompasses cryptocurrency and provides the Commodity Futures Trading Commission with jurisdiction over digital asset transactions. This definition of digital commodity has two important implications. First, it signals the lawmakers’ tendency to generalize cryptocurrency as a commodity. Second, it brings complications into how creditors—especially individual crypto account holders—can recover in the recent bankruptcy cases involving prominent crypto companies. This Comment contains four components. First, it provides a brief explanation of cryptocurrency …

Cross Border Restructuring And Bankruptcy Litigation Ft. Kobre & Kim Llp, Cardozo International Law Society (Cils)

Flyers 2023-2024

No abstract provided.

Against Bankruptcy: Public Litigation Values Versus The Endless Quest For Global Peace In Mass Litigation, Abbe Gluck, Elizabeth Chamblee Burch, Adam Zimmerman

Scholarly Works

Can bankruptcy court solve a public health crisis? Should the goal of “global peace” in complex lawsuits trump traditional litigation values in a system grounded in public participation and jurisdictional redundancy? How much leeway do courts have to innovate civil procedure?

These questions have finally reached the Supreme Court in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P., the $6 billion bankruptcy that purports to achieve global resolution of all current and future opioids suits against the company and its former family owners, the Sacklers. The case provides a critical opportunity to reflect on what is lost when parties in mass torts find …

Stakeholder Capitalism’S Greatest Challenge: Reshaping A Public Consensus To Govern A Global Economy, Leo E. Strine Jr., Michael Klain

Seattle University Law Review

The Berle XIV: Developing a 21st Century Corporate Governance Model Conference asks whether there is a viable 21st Century Stakeholder Governance model. In our conference keynote article, we argue that to answer that question yes requires restoring—to use Berle’s term—a “public consensus” throughout the global economy in favor of the balanced model of New Deal capitalism, within which corporations could operate in a way good for all their stakeholders and society, that Berle himself supported.

The world now faces problems caused in large part by the enormous international power of corporations and the institutional investors who dominate their governance. These …

Data In Distress: Effectuating State Data Privacy Laws During Bankruptcy, Cameron Love

Emory Law Journal

In 2000, an online toy retailer, Toysmart.com, attempted to liquidate consumer data to pay creditors in its bankruptcy case. The attempted sale drew objections from the Federal Trade Commission and forty-seven state attorneys general. Five years later, Congress attempted to resolve privacy concerns in bankruptcy, amending the Bankruptcy Code to provide clear procedures for the liquidation of “personally identifiable information.” Recently, scholars have criticized these amendments, characterizing them as “limited,” “outdated,” and “privacy theater.” This Comment adds to these criticisms, arguing the amendments’ failure to mandate consideration of relevant nonbankruptcy law puts these permissive sales procedures on a collision course …

Safe Harboring Sloppiness: The Scope Of, And Available Remedies Under, Sections 363(M) And 364(E), Vishal Patel

Emory Bankruptcy Developments Journal

No abstract provided.

Third-Party Bankruptcy Releases And The Separation Of Powers: A Stern Look, Henry Reynolds

Emory Bankruptcy Developments Journal

In the last few years, bankruptcy scholars and professionals have criticized mass tort debtors’ use of chapter 11 bankruptcy as a litigation forum. One such criticism concerns mass tort debtors’ use of third-party releases: provisions in chapter 11 reorganization plans that enjoin creditors’ claims against non-debtor third parties. If a bankruptcy court approves such releases, creditors lose claims against the released third parties, which often include the debtor’s directors, insurers, or employees.

Third-party releases have troubled many. Critics and courts have said that third-party releases violate (1) the Bankruptcy Code, (2) bankruptcy policy, (3) the constitutional right to due process, …

Rethinking Antebellum Bankruptcy, Rafael I. Pardo

Scholarship@WashULaw

Bankruptcy law has been repeatedly reinvented over time in response to changing circumstances. The Bankruptcy Act of 1841—passed by Congress to address the financial ruin caused by the Panic of 1837—constituted a revolutionary break from its immediate predecessor, the Bankruptcy Act of 1800, which was the nation’s first bankruptcy statute. Although Congress repealed the 1841 Act in 1843, the legislation lasted significantly longer than recognized by scholars. The repeal legislation permitted pending bankruptcy cases to be finally resolved pursuant to the Act’s terms. Because debtors flooded the judicially understaffed 1841 Act system with over 46,000 cases, the Act’s administration continued …

Stakeholder Governance On The Ground (And In The Sky), Stephen Johnson, Frank Partnoy

Seattle University Law Review

Professor Frank Partnoy: This is a marvelous gathering, and it is all due to Chuck O’Kelley and the special gentleness, openness, and creativity that he brings to this symposium. For more than a decade, he has been open to new and creative ways to discuss important issues surrounding business law and Adolf Berle’s legacy. We also are grateful to Dorothy Lund for co-organizing this gathering.

In introducing Stephen Johnson, I am reminded of a previous Berle, where Chuck allowed me some time to present the initial thoughts that led to my book, WAIT: The Art and Science of Delay. Part …

Weed Like Our Money Back: Amending Pennsylvania’S Medical Cannabis Law For Insolvent Cannabusinesses, Nikolajs V. Gaikis

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

In 2016, Pennsylvania joined what is now 37 states and the District of Columbia in legalizing medical cannabis. The Commonwealth’s cannabusinesses share in a struggle that is common in other legal jurisdictions: operating within the confines of the Controlled Substances Act and the Bankruptcy Code. Insolvent individuals and businesses that profit from cannabis or hold cannabis assets cannot declare bankruptcy because cannabis is a Schedule I drug. Under state law, other insolvency alternatives like an assignment for the benefit of creditors, receiverships, and compositions with creditors exist as potential alternatives.

Pennsylvania’s insolvent cannabusinesses are in a uniquely poor position because …

Rethinking Antebellum Bankruptcy, Rafael I. Pardo

University of Colorado Law Review

Bankruptcy law has been repeatedly reinvented over time in response to changing circumstances. The Bankruptcy Act of 1841—passed by Congress to address the financial ruin caused by the Panic of 1837—constituted a revolutionary break from its immediate predecessor, the Bankruptcy Act of 1800, which was the nation’s first bankruptcy statute. Although Congress repealed the 1841 Act in 1843, the legislation lasted significantly longer than recognized by scholars. The repeal legislation permitted pending bankruptcy cases to be finally resolved pursuant to the Act’s terms. Because debtors flooded the judicially understaffed 1841 Act system with over 46,000 cases, the Act’s administration continued …

A Bona Fide Dispute: Can Bankrupt Debtors Sell Assets Free And Clear Of Federal Civil Forfeiture Claims?, Joseph Peter Gomez

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

Auctions are wheeling-dealing extravaganzas in which frenzies of bidders fight over shiny objects. What would happen if the government busted down the doors of the auction house, took the shiny objects, and sold them online? An asset sale through section 363(b) of the Bankruptcy Code provides a court-supervised opportunity to maximize economic value for the bankruptcy estate. To sell estate assets, the debtor must either (1) pay off each creditor holding an interest in the assets or (2) strip the creditor’s interest and attach it to the proceeds of the sale. When the government asserts a civil forfeiture claim against …

The Lease Of All Evils: How A Middle-Ground Approach Can Resolve The Bankruptcy Code Conflict Between Section 363(F) Sales And Section 365(H) Lessee Protections, Kate Christensen

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

The Fifth Circuit’s recent decision in In re Royal St. Bistro, LLC has awakened an unsettled issue in the Bankruptcy Code that has divided the bankruptcy community for over two decades. The question examined by the Fifth Circuit was whether a non-debtor lessee with a right to continued possession through section 365(h) of the Bankruptcy Code loses this right if the debtor-lessor can sell its property “free and clear” under section 363(f). While early decisions held that section 365(h) always protects lessees against debtors’ free and clear sales, some subsequent decisions created a circuit split by ruling that section 365(h) …

Creditors, Shareholders, And Losers In Between: A Failed Regulatory Experiment, Albert H. Choi, Jeffery Zhang

Law & Economics Working Papers

In the aftermath of the 2007-08 Global Financial Crisis, regulators encouraged many of the world’s largest banks to hold a new type of regulatory instrument with the goal of improving their safety and soundness. The regulatory instrument was known as a “CoCo,” short for contingent convertible bond. CoCos are neither debt nor equity. They are something in between, designed to give the bank a shot in the arm during times of stress. Many of the largest international banks have issued CoCos worth hundreds of billions of dollars. After more than ten years—a decade that includes the collapse of Credit Suisse …