Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Among the most hard-fought battles involving insurers, policyholders, and asbestos claimants are those that have played out in bankruptcy courts, district courts and courts of appeals called upon to review orders confirming plans of reorganization in asbestos bankruptcies. In several instances, appellate courts have overturned such orders. See, e.g., In re Global Indus.Techs., Inc., 645 F.3d 201 (3d Cir. 2011) (“GIT“); In the Matter of Thorpe Insulation Co., 677 F.3d 869 (9th Cir. 2012); In re Combustion Eng'g, Inc , 391 F.3d 190 (3d Cir. 2005) (“CE“).
A characteristic feature of these asbestos bankruptcies is the creation of asbestos personal injury trusts to pay the claims previously brought against the bankrupt asbestos defendant. As of May 2011, there were 56 asbestos trusts in operation, with several more in process. In re Fed.-Mogul Global Inc., 684 F.3d 355, 360 (3d Cir. 2012). A major source of the funding for these trusts has been insurance settlements. Id. Because of the importance of insurance assets to asbestos bankruptcies, the objections of insurers ' as well as question of whether insurers even have standing to object ' have become central issues in these bankruptcies.
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.