Follow Us
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
This two-part article will examine the role of third-party releases in successful Chapter 11 reorganizations. This part will address the factors considered in each Circuit where such releases have been deemed permissible within the confines of the Bankruptcy Code, evaluate several recent cases highlighting the uncertainty created by the current Circuit split, and consider options for creating a clear, nationwide standard.
For nearly three decades, courts have wrestled with whether and to what extent the U.S. Bankruptcy Code authorizes non-debtor, third-party releases in a Chapter 11 plan of reorganization. The results over that time have yielded continuing confusion and uncertainty. While three of the 11 Circuit Courts are united in disallowing third-party releases entirely, the other eight provide separate justifications for allowing them, and their differing standards are often disjointedly applied. Although such releases are supposed to apply only in “rare and unique” cases, as one judge observed, “almost every proposed Chapter 11 Plan that I receive includes proposed releases.” In re Aegean Marine Petroleum Network, 599 B.R. 717, 726 (S.D.N.Y. 2019).
Continue reading by getting
started with a subscription.
Appellate Courts Skeptical About Bankruptcy Court Sanctions
By Michael L. Cook
Recent appellate decisions reflect a distaste for appeals from bankruptcy court sanction orders. A split Fourth Circuit even refused to hear such an appeal. Other courts tend to limit sanctions or, alternatively, accept a bankruptcy judge’s findings under a stringent “abuse of discretion” standard.
Supreme Court’s Rejection of Purdue Pharma Settlement Redefines Releases In Chapter 11
By Angelo Castaldi
The U.S. Supreme Court has issued its most anticipated bankruptcy decision in recent memory. In a 5-4 decision entered June 27, the Supreme Court struck down the nonconsensual third-party releases. Writing for the Court, Justice Neil Gorsuch ruled that nothing in the Bankruptcy Code authorized the nonconsensual release or discharge of claims of opioid victims against the Sacklers, who were not debtors themselves.
Ninth Circuit: Debt In Asset Case Is Nondischargeable If Debtor Fails to Properly Schedule the Debt
By Lawrence J. Kotler and Geoffrey A. Heaton
In a recent published decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed a previously unresolved question in that circuit: whether a debtor’s failure to properly schedule a debt in an “asset case” renders the debt nondischargeable.
Is the Rule Preventing Bankruptcy Judges from Appointing Special Masters Outdated?
By Mark B. Conlan and Noel L. Hillman
Rule 9031 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure prevents all bankruptcy judges, and, if broadly interpreted, any federal judge hearing bankruptcy cases and proceedings, from appointing special masters. The rule has not been amended since its adoption in 1983. It is outdated and should be repealed or amended to accord with the reality of today’s complex Chapter 11 cases.
Copyright © ALM Global, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
