Supreme Court

Did Gorsuch Expand Bankruptcy Court Referral Power?

02/01/17
Newly minted Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch sat on the Tenth Circuit for ten years.  During that time, he signed on to eleven opinions regarding bankruptcy, which means that he wrote about bankruptcy around once a year.    None of his opinions are particularly well-known.  (In contrast, fellow finalist Thomas Hardiman authored the opinion in Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors vs. CIT Group/Business Credit, Inc. (In re Jevic Holding Corp.), 787 F.3d 173 (3rd Cir.
[more]

Punt, Pass or Kick? Supreme Court Struggles With Jevic at Oral Argument

12/09/16

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in the case of Czyzewski v.

[more]

NCBJ Report 2016: Broken Bench Radio

10/28/16
The first plenary session of NCBJ was Broken Bench Radio, a fast-paced discussion of hot topics in the form of a radio call-in show.   It covered insights from the Caesar's Entertainment case, upcoming Supreme Court decisions, recharacterization, equitable mootness, Chapter 13 updates, the CFPB and the Husky case.  
Insights From Caesar's Entertainment
[more]

Jevic Could Be the Most Consequential Chapter 11 Decision in Many Years

10/14/16

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case of Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp. during the new term that began last week.  The questions it presents are relatively simple.  First, can a bankruptcy court, in dismissing a case under the U.S.

[more]

Supreme Court Says Lawyers Don't Get Paid for Defending Their Fees

07/08/15

A Texas law firm did a great job and beat back a punitive attack on their fees.   However, the Supreme Court has ruled that they may not receive compensation for defending their work.   Baker Botts, LLP v. ASARCO, LLC, No. 14-103 (6/15/15).

Introduction

[more]

Baker Botts v. Asarco: The Supreme Court Shows Again That It Really Doesn’t Understand Corporate Bankruptcy Cases

06/18/15

The Supreme Court has not handled its recent major bankruptcy decisions well. The jurisdictional confusion engendered by its 2011 decision in Stern v. Marshall was only partially clarified by this term’s opinion in Wellness International Network v. Sharif.

[more]

Supreme Court Extends Dewsnup But Suggests They Really Don't Care for the Decision

06/02/15
The Supreme Court extended the holding of Dewsnup v. Timm, 502 U.S. 410 (1992) to a fully unsecured junior lien in a chapter 7 case.    However, the Court suggested in a footnote that they are ready to reconsider the underlying precedent.    This suggests that the Petitioners may have lost because they were not bold enough in challenging Dewsnup.   Bank of America v. Caulkett, No.
[more]

Supreme Court Decides to Maintain the Viability of the U.S. Bankruptcy Courts, But a Key Question Remains Unresolved

05/28/15

Four years ago, in Stern v. Marshall, the Supreme Court stunned many observers by re-visiting separation of powers issues regarding the jurisdiction of the United States bankruptcy courts that most legal scholars had viewed as long settled. Stern significantly reduced the authority of bankruptcy courts, and bankruptcy judges and practitioners both have since been grappling with the ramifications of that decision.

[more]

Wellness Case Brings Healing for Bankruptcy Court Authority

05/26/15
Resolving an issue left open by two prior decisions, the Supreme Court ruled that the right to entry of a final judgment by an Article III court, like the right to trial by jury, is a personal right which can be waived or consented away.    The decision left Chief Justice Roberts, whose broad language in Stern v. Marshall spawned a plethora law review articles, in the minority, while Justice Sotomayor spoke for the six justices in the majority.
[more]

Supreme Court Rules Debtor Entitled to Funds Remaining Upon Conversion of Chapter 13 Case

05/19/15
Acknowledging that the statutory language "does not say expressly" what should happen, the Supreme Court nevertheless ruled that undistributed funds held by the Chapter 13 trustee should be returned to the debtor following a conversion.   The Court described its result as "the most sensible reading of what Congress did provide."   Justice Ginsberg wrote the opinion for an unanimous Court.   Harris v. Viegelahn, No. 14-400 (5/18/15).
[more]