Bankruptcy Law Commons^™

Bankruptcy Preemption Of Malicious Prosecution Actions: Cogan V. Trabucco, Alyssa Knecht

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

This Note examines jurisdiction over state torts that arise during a bankruptcy proceeding. Recently, the Ninth Circuit permitted a collateral attack on a state court judgment regarding malicious prosecution in Cogan v. Trabucco. The Ninth Circuit held that federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction over malicious prosecution actions and that abuse of process state torts are completely preempted by federal law. This decision left the debtor without any redress and divested state courts of jurisdiction over cases under its own tort law. This Note argues the Ninth Circuit, in Cogan, erroneously made “related to” jurisdiction exclusive and incorrectly held that federal …

Fraudulent Transfers And Sovereign Immunity, David G. Carlson

Articles

The article argues that the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Miller was wrongly decided because it failed to recognize that sovereign immunity is waivable and does not protect the government when it trespasses upon preexisting property rights. The analysis contends that fraudulent transfer claims are quasi in rem actions, meaning the sovereign is subject to the incidental procedures of bankruptcy once enmeshed in such proceedings.

The Safe Harbor For Leveraged Buyouts In Bankruptcy, David G. Carlson

Articles

No abstract provided.

Corporate Evolution, Omari Scott Simmons

Cardozo Law Review

Political entrepreneurs have declared war on environmental, social, and governance policies ("ESG"), going so far as to attempt to criminalize ESG-influenced investing. They seek a return to some real or imagined past. They amplify and elevate their efforts into mainstream public discourse. They pursue extraordinary goals and tactics to disrupt and even dismantle institutional structures, norms, and established processes. The contemporary anti-ESG backlash is not simply a battle over corporate purpose and the dueling perspectives of shareholder primacy versus stakeholderism or disputes concerning sustainable investment and operational strategies. It reflects aggressive political entrepreneurship and the tension between competing narratives: stasis, …

Equity And Clarity: The Impact Of Tyler V. Hennepin County On Property Taxation And Homeowners’ Rights, Analy Feigel

Cardozo Law Review

This Note explores the implications ofthe U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Tyler v. Hennepin County, which significantly impacts property taxation and foreclosure laws. The Court ruled that property owners are entitled to surplus proceeds following a tax foreclosure, setting a new precedent by deeming it unconstitutional for governments to retain surplus proceeds without just compensation. Tyler clarified property rights under the Fifth Amendment, affirming that owners have a constitutional right to the surplus value of their foreclosed properties, even if local statutes do not explicitly allow it.

Further, this Note also addresses unresolved issues following Tyler's ruling, including how the …

Scaling 'Reverse Cfius': A Comparative Review Of Outbound Foreign Investment, Hannah Pérez

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

The note examines the evolution of U.S. regulations on outbound foreign investments, particularly under Executive Order 14105, known as "Reverse CFIUS," aimed at mitigating national security risks by restricting investments in critical industries in countries like China. It explores the legal, economic, and geopolitical implications of these regulations and compares them with similar measures in the EU, Japan, and Australia, emphasizing the need for international cooperation to effectively address these security concerns.

Collusive Foreclosure Sales: The Forgotten Legacy Of Northern Pacific V. Boyd, David G. Carlson

Articles

In BFP v. Resolution Trust Corp. (1994), the Supreme Court ruled that mortgage foreclosures could not be fraudulent conveyances – unless the foreclosure was “collusive.” It gave no clue what made mortgage foreclosures collusive. But in 1913, the Supreme Court defined collusive mortgage foreclosures in a famous railroad receivership case – Northern Pacific R. Co. v. Boyd. Boyd is usually thought to be the origin of the absolute priority rule in bankruptcy reorganization. Actually, it was a mortgage foreclosure sale. What made the sale collusive is that some of the shareholders of the defaulting railroad were also the shareholders of …

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

2023–2024 Flyers

No abstract provided.

Modular Bankruptcy: Toward A Consumer Scheme Of Arrangement, John A.E. Pottow

Cardozo Law Review

In the world of cross-border corporate insolvency, those in the know are familiar with the increasingly popular scheme of arrangement, the British quasi-reorganization procedure that allows a company to restructure some, but not all, of its debt. The typical scheme effects a corporate balance sheet reshuffling by supermajoritarian approval (and judicial “sanction”) but often leaves other debt, such as the trade, untouched. A key conceptual component of the scheme mechanism is its intentional modularity, called by some its “selectivity.” It does not require a comprehensive reckoning of all claims against a given debtor, only some. The scheme has proved popular—so …

Regulating Cryptocurrency: A Comparative Analysis Of U.S. And Eu Approaches, Xander Xueyang Peng

Cardozo International & Comparative Law Review

The note compares the regulatory approaches of the U.S. and the EU regarding cryptocurrency, focusing on sanctions and anti-money laundering (AML). It argues that while the EU has implemented a comprehensive regulatory framework, the U.S. relies on fragmented enforcement actions and lacks a unified approach. The EU's structured regulations, such as the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) framework, are more effective in addressing the challenges posed by cryptocurrency, including traceability and compliance. The note advocates for the U.S. to adopt a more robust regulatory framework, including know-your-customer (KYC) requirements and stricter AML measures, to enhance accountability and security in the crypto …

Stronger - Not Together: The Needed Elimination Of Mandatory Arbitration For Sexual Misconduct Claims Against The United States Olympic & Paralympic Committee & International Olympic Committee, Peri L. Ayzidor

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

Mandatory arbitration clauses have acted as litigation blocks in employment and commercial contracts for decades. The downfall of such clauses was catalyzed by the infamous trial of Olympic doctor, Larry Nassar. The grueling evidence and testimony sparked the creation of acts such as the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act ("EFSASHA"), which barred the enforcement of mandatory arbitration clauses in claims involving sexual misconduct. Mandatory/forced arbitration clauses keep any claims made by employees or individuals private and limits their right to take a claim to court. Such clauses make it almost impossible for sexual misconduct survivors …

Service Of Process Via Nft Airdrops: The Pathway To Private Litigation For Injured Web3 Plaintiffs, Sophia Dudgeon

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The note explores the evolving landscape of legal process in the digital age, focusing on the use of blockchain technology and NFTs for serving legal notices. It argues that courts are increasingly adapting traditional due process principles, such as those established in Mullane v. Alabama, to accommodate emerging technologies. The analysis highlights the landmark case LCX AG v. 1.274M U.S. Dollar Coin, where a court approved serving process via NFT airdrop, demonstrating how technological innovations can enhance access to justice in digital asset disputes. The author advocates for courts to embrace expansive interpretations of alternative service methods to …

Murder On The Chapter 13 Express, David G. Carlson

Articles

In Mortgage Corp. of the South v. Bozeman (2023), the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a confirmed chapter 13 plan was unworthy of res judicata respect. In so ruling, it held itself not bound by the Supreme Court’s super-finality opinion in United Student Aid Funds v. Espinosa. The Eleventh Circuit thought that it was preventing the chapter 13 plan from “murdering” the home mortgage. In reality, the plan was lawful and upheld payment in full of the mortgage. The debtor was actually trying to end the plan early before the mortgage was paid. The Bozeman court should have …

Foreclosure Sales As Fraudulent Transfers, David G. Carlson

Articles

The Supreme Court has declared that noncollusive, regularly conducted foreclosure sales are not “constructive” fraudulent transfers voidable by a bankruptcy trustee Uniform state legislation ratifies this instinct for private creditor enforcements. But collusive or irregular foreclosure sales or sales that are intended to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors are subject to creditor attack, even though unsecured creditors are not proper parties to the foreclosure process. In such cases, unsecured creditors can cloud the title obtained from foreclosure in the cases of collusion, irregularity or fraudulent intent. This article examines precisely when foreclosure sales can be avoided by unsecured creditors of …

Arguing Arbitration Waiver After Morgan V. Sundance A Path To Hold Debt Buyers Accountable For Abusive Collection Litigation, Noa Gutow-Ellis

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the impact of the Supreme Court's decision in Morgan v. Sundance on consumers' ability to challenge debt buyers in court under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). It argues that Morgan has provided a significant opportunity for consumers to argue that debt buyers have waived their right to arbitration, thereby allowing consumers to pursue FDCPA claims in court rather than being forced into arbitration. The article highlights the abusive practices of debt buyers, particularly their targeting of low-income and minority communities, and proposes strategies to hold debt buyers accountable.

Silencing Litigation Through Bankruptcy, Pamela Foohey, Christopher K. Odinet

Articles

Bankruptcy is being used as a tool for silencing survivors and their families. When faced with claims from multiple plaintiffs related to the same wrongful conduct that can financially or operationally crush the defendant over the long term—a phenomenon we identify as onslaught litigation—defendants harness bankruptcy’s reorganization process to draw together those who allege harm and pressure them into a swift, universal settlement. In doing so, they use the bankruptcy system to deprive survivors of their voice and the public of the truth. This Article identifies this phenomenon and argues that it is time to rein in this destructive use …

The Housing Bubble And Consumer Banruptcy (Parts Iii And Iv), David G. Carlson

Articles

During the COVID pandemic housing prices have soared. Consumers who have filed for bankruptcy are now looking at enormous realized and unrealized capital gains. This article assesses the chances that these consumer debtors can keep these gains out of the hands of their creditors. Part II of this two-part article addresses chapter 13 issues, which concern plan modification by the chapter 13 trustee to capture realized and unrealized capital gains. It also covers whether a trustee in a converted case can capture these gains. The law of the coverted chapter 7 case is spectacularly contradictory.

Brief For Amici Curiae Bankruptcy Law Professors In Support Of Petitioner, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

Amici, whose names and affiliations are set forth in alphabetical order on Appendix A, are law professors who study the United States’ bankruptcy system. They have published in some of the nation’s leading academic journals on corporate reorganization issues, including the case sub judice. They write solely based on their concern about the effect that the opinion below will have on this system.

Petitioner argues that the decision of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in this case should be reversed because the United States Bankruptcy Code does not permit the nonconsensual nondebtor release (“NDR”) of the Debtors’ owners (the …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Law Professors In Support Of Appellant On The Role Of Bankruptcy Examiners In Chapter 11 Reorganization, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

Amici curiae, whose biographical information appears on Appendix A (“Amici”), are professors at law schools in the Third Circuit and around the nation. They study and write extensively about bankruptcy and related business law subjects. Their work has appeared in many of the nation’s leading academic journals, and includes path-breaking scholarship on the use of bankruptcy examiners in freefall and cryptocurrency cases.

Amici share a commitment to the transparent and efficient administration of the chapter 11 system, and a belief that the interest of the public and creditors in this large and notorious chapter 11 case must be vindicated …

Judicial Interpretation By Bankruptcy Courts And The Department Of Education Regarding The Application Of The Undue Hardship ("Brunner") Standard To Student Loan Discharges, Anda Totoreanu

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The note examines the stringent application of the Brunner standard in student loan discharge cases, highlighting the inconsistent judicial interpretations and the DOE's rigid stance, which disproportionately affects minority communities. It advocates for reforms, including legislative changes and judicial discretion, to address the systemic inequities.

The Housing Bubble And Consumer Bankruptcy (Parts I And Ii), David G. Carlson

Articles

During the COVID pandemic housing prices have soared. Consumers who have filed for bankruptcy are now looking at enormous realized and unrealized capital gains. This article assesses the chances that these consumer debtors can keep these gains out of the hands of their creditors. Part I of this two-part article addresses chapter 7 issues, which concern lien stripping, abandonment, and monetary exemptions. It also addresses lien stripping in chapter 13 cases. Part II will address whether a chapter 13 debtor must surrender appreciation value to the chapter 13 trustee or to a trustee in a converted chapter 7 case.

Right For Any Reason, Jeffrey M. Anderson

Cardozo Law Review

The chances of winning an appeal in federal court are slim. One reason for that is an array of rules of appellate review that “stack the deck” in favor of the appellee and the lower court’s judgment. One such rule of review is “right for any reason,” the rule that an appellee may defend a lower court’s judgment on any grounds supported by the record—even grounds that the lower court rejected or ignored. The judgment may be right, even if the reasons are wrong. In 1924, the Supreme Court described the rule as “settled”—and felt no need to cite authority …

The Future Of Arbitration In The United States: Textualism, A Tectonic Shift, And A Reshaping Of The Civil Justice System, Imre S. Szalai

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

No abstract provided.

Introductory Remarks, Ethan Bordman, Ira S. Dizengoff, Sophie Dizengoff

Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal

The article discusses the legal implications and challenges surrounding college athletes' rights to profit from their name, image, and likeness (NIL), following the NCAA's 2021 decision to lift its ban on athletes cashing in on their fame. The symposium explores the evolving legal landscape, including regulatory frameworks, equity issues, and the role of collectives, highlighting the need for clearer guidelines to address the complexities arising from this change.

Third-Party Releases Under The Bankruptcy Code After Purdue Pharma, Jeanne L. Schroeder, David G. Carlson

Articles

The biggest bankruptcy case ever (as measured by unsecured claims against a debtor-in-possession) is In re Purdue Pharma, LLC. The bankruptcy court affirmed a plan discharging the Sackler family (equity owners and often officers of Purdue) of all “derivative” claims that belonged to the debtor-in-possession. The settlement was bought for a substantial sum payable over time by the Sacklers. A debtor-in-possession is the sole owner of a derivative claim and has the power to bind all the creditors to a settlement. Under the Bankruptcy Code, a plan discharging derivative claims is confirmable. In fact, as we will, show, a great …

Ftx And The Future Of Crypto, Heyman Center On Corporate Governance

2022 Event Invitations

Join cryptocurrency and blockchain expert Aaron Wright, bankruptcy attorney Allen Kadish, securities regulation and fintech expert Professor Yuliya Guseva, and white collar crime expert Professor Andrew Jennings for a lively online conversation moderated by Cardozo Professor Matthew Wansley. We'll dive into cryptocurrency exchanges, the issues faced by FTX, why it collapsed, how bankruptcy will play out, and whether its executives face any legal liability.

Generalized Creditors And Particularized Creditors: Against A Unified Theory Of Standing In Bankruptcy, David G. Carlson, Jeanne L. Schroeder

Articles

Courts have struggled toward a unified theory to explain when the trustee has exclusive jurisdiction to sue a third party for harms done to a bankrupt debtor, and when creditors have exclusive jurisdiction to sue the third party. Courts have proclaimed that when every creditor can sue the third party, then none of them can, and the right belongs solely to the trustee. Creditor rights are “generalized.” If only a proper subset of creditors can sue the third party, then the trustee is not able to subrogate to the subset. Such creditors are “particularized.” This paper proclaims the test a …

Whose Debt Is It Anyway?, Luís C. Calderón Gómez

Articles

Every year, companies issue hundreds of billions of dollars of debt with a feature carrying unclear tax consequences. So do individuals, who frequently tie their most significant financial asset to this type of instrument. Yet this instrument is not an exotic or innovative financial derivative, but is simple vanilla debt with two or more borrowers, or “co-obligated debt”. Co-obligated debt poses a conceptual problem for the law because it does not fit neatly into the simple and dyadic legal framework underlying the law’s conception of debt, where one creditor lends money to one borrower in exchange for a direct promise …

Amicus Curiae Brief Of The Hon. Judith Fitzgerald (Bankruptcy Judge, Ret.), And Law Professors Pamela Foohey, George Kuney, Robert Lawless, Jonathan Lipson, Bruce A. Markell, Nancy Rapoport, Richard Squire, Ray Warner And Jack Williams, In Support Of The Petitioner, Pamela Foohey

Amicus Briefs

Your amici have taught courses on bankruptcy and commercial law, conducted research, and have been frequent speakers and lecturers at seminars and conferences throughout the United States. Each is highly regarded in this field, and each has made substantial contributions to bankruptcy scholarship and jurisprudence.

The question presented to this Court is as follows: “Whether Bankruptcy Code Section 363(m) limits the appellate court’s jurisdiction over any sale order or order deemed integral to a sale order. . . .” (emphasis added). Pet. i. The answer is that § 363(m) does not limit appellate review of the transaction involved in this …

Bankruptcy As Social Safety Net, Pamela Foohey

Online Publications

One in ten Americans have filed bankruptcy at some point during their adult lives. Contrary to the pronouncements of some politicians, these filings do not reflect a series of personal failures and should not be understood as failures of character. Indeed, most of the people who file bankruptcy struggle for years to pay their debts before turning to bankruptcy law and courts for help. And most of the people who file say that they felt shame upon filing. Instead, the bankruptcy filings of millions and millions of people reflect systematic policy choices over the past forty years that have left …