Law Commons^™

Bankruptcy Courts And Stare Decisis: The Need For Restructuring, Jeffrey J. Brookner

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

Part I of this Note provides background by summarizing the rules of stare decisis. Part II refutes the contention that the present court structure allows bankruptcy judges not to follow domestic district court precedent. Part II asserts that, in pursuit of legitimate ends, bankruptcy judges have employed illegitimate means. Finally, Part II contends that bankruptcy judges are better equipped to make bankruptcy decisions than district judges. Part III concludes that the bankruptcy system should be restructured to allow bankruptcy judges to make decisions without being constrained by district court precedent or appeals. Such reform could achieve the substantive goals desired …

The Fantastic Wisconsylvania Zero-Bureaucratic-Cost School Of Bankruptcy Theory: A Comment, James W. Bowers

Michigan Law Review

In two recently published articles, Wisconsin Law Professor Lynn LoPucki and Pennsylvania Law Professor Elizabeth Warren, nearly simultaneously, fired the latest shots in one of academia's hottest ongoing debates: whether any good reason for having bankruptcy law exists. Justice Holmes once opined that the future belonged to the lawyer skilled in statistics and economics. LoPucki and Warren apparently agree about statistics but argue that, in a world with positive transaction costs, economic theory has little to contribute to our understanding about the justifications for bankruptcy law.

I write to highlight what one might easily overlook in LoPucki's and Warren's pieces. …