Click to enter your existing username and password or create a new account. Click to purchase an individual user subscription with your credit card.
Not For Reprint
Page printed from:
Legal Pros Discuss How to Handle Personally Identifiable Information In Bankruptcy Cases
Large amounts of data including personally identifiable information can be compromised in the event that debtors file for bankruptcy, and sell the information to pay back creditors.
4 minute readJuly 31, 2025 at 11:01 PM
By
Ella Sherman
Large amounts of data including personally identifiable information can be compromised in the event that debtors file for bankruptcy, and sell the information to pay back creditors.
During the New York City Bar’s “Bankruptcy and the Privacy Line: When Personal Information Becomes an Asset” panel in July, legal professionals discussed the evolving privacy landscape and the handling of personally identifiable information (PII) in bankruptcy cases.
This premium content is locked for The Bankruptcy Strategist subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN The Bankruptcy Strategist
Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Letter Agreement Between Landlord and Tenant Did Not Extinguish GuarantyTreble Damage Award Upheld; Landlord Failed to Establish Overcharge Was Not WillfulDenying Access to Landlord Constituted Breach Entitling Landlord to PossessionTenant Entitled to Yellowstone Injunction With Respect to Taxes and Sewer Charges
New York is one of the first states to adopt laws to regulate artificial intelligence use in advertising and to strengthen post-mortem publicity rights regarding AI-generated replicas and “synthetic performers.” Given the state’s role as a bellwether for consumer-protection and advertising regulation, these new laws, combined with the state’s broader AI legislative framework, represent a shift toward transparency, consent and accountability.
State app store age verification regimes do more than reallocate responsibility between platforms and developers. They create a new data supply chain for age knowledge, one that can move COPPA questions from “do we ask age?” to “what do we do when the platform tells us?” The teams that handle this best will treat platform age signals as sensitive compliance inputs: minimize them, tightly control where they flow, and design product behavior so that minors do not trigger unnecessary collection or disclosure.
The firms leading right now chose to ask what would become possible if they managed the entire revenue lifecycle — from invoice generation to cash receipt — in one place, and what AI could actually accomplish with complete data instead of partial feeds. That is the Power of One.
A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY), United States v. Heppner, has generated outsized commentary suggesting that the use of generative AI tools may jeopardize attorney-client privilege. A closer reading shows something far less dramatic.