Bankruptcy Law Commons^™

Chapter 13: Let’S Call The Whole Thing Off, Lawrence Ponoroff

Emory Bankruptcy Developments Journal

Courts cannot agree on much of anything about chapter 13, and legislators cannot agree and are confused over what to do about it. This state of affairs benefits no one and shows no signs of abating. So, in this Article, I propose to throw in the towel by imagining a world without chapter 13. Spoiler alert: although I am not superstitious, with just a few tweaks and tucks to chapter 7, I think the Bankruptcy Code might just be better off operating like a high-rise elevator that goes directly from floor twelve to floor fourteen. I will lay it out …

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, …

Debtor Needs To Have Benefitted From Fraud To Be Barred A Discharge Under 11 U.S.C. § 523(A)(2)(A), Elizabeth Tighe

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) provides that a court may grant a debtor a discharge of its debts, subject to certain conditions and exceptions. One exception to dischargeability is set forth in section 523(a)(2)(A), which bars a discharge from debt “for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent obtained by . . . false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor's or an insider's financial condition.”

A key phrase in the statute is “obtained by” and courts have applied a …

The Continued Growth Of The Presumption Against Extraterritoriality And Its Impact On The Bankruptcy Code’S Avoidance Provisions, Michael Vandermark

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Exceprt)

Over the past several years, ever since the United States Supreme Court’s seminal decision in Morrison v. National Australia Bank Limited, the presumption against extraterritoriality has steadily expanded across much of the legal field. In doing so, the presumption has again become the dominant standard in deciding whether Congressional legislation may be used on an extraterritorial basis. This expansion has recently encompassed portions of the Bankruptcy Code, specifically, its avoidance provisions.

The presumption, as noted in detail below, relies on the premise that although the legislature has the authority to regulate beyond the borders of the United States, …

The Immovable Object Versus The Irresistable Force: Rethinking The Relationship Between Secured Credit And Bankruptcy Policy, Lawrence Ponoroff, F. Stephen Knippenberg

Michigan Law Review

The last leaf in O. Henry's classic short story was hanging by a delicate thread, but it never fell. It never fell, of course, because it wasn't real; Old Behrman had painted it (and caught pneumonia for his trouble) in order to give Johnsy the will to live. The Supreme Court's decision in Dewsnup v. Timm is also hanging by a thread, following a barrage of scholarly criticism and more than four years of limiting case law and legislative incursions on the case's core conceptual rationale. But the holding in Dewsnup, unlike the last leaf, is very real. It has …

A Rule Unvanquished: The New Value Exception To The Absolute Priority Rule, Clifford S. Harris

Michigan Law Review

This Note examines whether the new value exception remains part of the revised Bankruptcy Code. Part I discusses the background of the new value exception. Part II traces the development of the conflict concerning the survival of the new value exception subsequent to the adoption of the Code. It then discusses the Supreme Court's opinions in Mid/antic National Bank v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and its progeny, which established the methodology for determining the impact of the revised Bankruptcy Code on preexisting bankruptcy law. Based on an analysis of the Midlantic doctrine, Part II concludes that Congress did …