Law Commons^™

Committee Capture? An Empirical Analysis Of The Role Of Creditors' Committees In Business Reorganizations, Michelle M. Harner, Jamie Marincic

Vanderbilt Law Review

The number of businesses experiencing financial distress increased significantly during the past several years. The number of Chapter 11 reorganization cases likewise rose. And many of these business failures were spectacular, leaving little value for creditors and even less for shareholders. Consequently, how the business debtor's limited asset pie is divided and who gets to allocate the pieces are very relevant and important questions.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Code generally contemplates the appointment of a committee of the debtor's unsecured creditors to serve as a fiduciary for all general unsecured creditors and as a statutory watchdog over the debtor and its …

Introduction To The Symposium "Convergence On Delaware: Corporate Bankruptcy And Corporate Governance", Robert K. Rasmussen, Charles M. Elson

Vanderbilt Law Review

Bankruptcy is back. The use of Chapter 11 by large, publicly held firms was a subject of much debate in the academic and popular press in the late 1980s and the early 1990s. Firms such as Texaco, Revco, LTV, Federated Department Stores, Maxwell Communications, TWA, and Eastern Airlines all filed for bankruptcy during that time. The economic boom of the mid- and late 1990s, however, resulted in a relative dearth of high-profile bankruptcy cases. The recent economic downturn has moved corporate reorganizations back into the spotlight. The Chapter 11 filings by firms such as Enron, Global Crossing, the Loewen Group, …

"Delaware Is Not A State": Are We Witnessing Jurisdictional Competition In Bankruptcy?, Marcus Cole

Vanderbilt Law Review

Over the last twelve years, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware has experienced exponential growth in the number of bankruptcy filings for large corporate debtors. This relatively recent rise in Delaware bankruptcy venue cannot, on its face, be explained by Delaware's eighty-five-year preeminence in the race for corporate charters, since the advantages most often postulated for Delaware's dominance in corporate law do not carry over to corporate bankruptcy. The state has limited influence over federal bankruptcy law and virtually no control over the selection of federal bankruptcy judges. This rise of Delaware bankruptcy venue, or Delawarization …

Chapter 11 Reorganization Cases And The Delaware Myth, Harvey R. Miller

Vanderbilt Law Review

Since the mid-1990s, there has been a spirited debate concerning the emergence of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Delaware Bankruptcy Court") as the virtual Chapter 11 capital for distressed debtor corporations. The "Delawarization" of corporate reorganizations under title 11 of the United States Code (the "Bankruptcy Code"), which occurred during the 1990s as a result of the migration of Chapter 11 cases of large enterprises from other venues to Delaware, has provoked a stream of academic articles debating the consequences of Delaware's emergence. Armed with statistics purporting to demonstrate a high rate of recidivism …

Toxic Torts And Chapter 11 Reorganization:The Problem Of Future Claims, Anne Hardiman

Vanderbilt Law Review

Recently, the toxic tort phenomenon has emerged as a vital concern to manufacturers, employers, and consumers as Agent Orange,' DES, Dalkon Shield, and asbestos victims have litigated toxic tort claims. Toxic torts are unique because any number of victims may be exposed to a toxic substance from which they may contract a disease as far as twenty years in the future. Toxic tort claims typically involve large sums of money and an inestimable number of plaintiffs. The potential for tremendous, financially crippling, liability for these injuries has prompted some asbestos companies to file for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the …

The Discharge Of Partnerships And Partners Under The Bankruptcy Code, Frank R. Kennedy

Vanderbilt Law Review

The provisions of the Bankruptcy Act applicable to partnerships, partners, and their creditors were cryptic. Significant changes in these provisions made by the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 have not appreciably diminished the difficulties of administering the estates of partnerships and partners in cases under Title 11 of the United States Code. The rules governing discharge of partnerships and partners and the dischargeability of their debts have given rise to a number of special problems under both the Bankruptcy Act and the Bankruptcy Reform Act. This Article undertakes to identify and analyze these problems and to suggest solutions.