Constitutional, Equitable, Statutory Mootness, and Denial of Cert.

The Circuit Court of Appeals of the 3rd Circuit recently issued its opinion in In re SCH Corp., et al, 2014 WL 2724606 in which it had the occasion  to review the application of the doctrine of "equitable mootness". The Court explained the distinctions between the concept of "mootness" (an Article III Constitutional issue), "equitable mootness", and "prudential considerations." In its application of the doctrine of "equitable mootness", the Court looked to the five-factor test set forth in In re Continental Airlines, 91 F.3d 553 (3rd Cir. 1996).  I reviewed this decision here.  
Statutory MootnessThe Court in SCH Corp. does not reach the concept of "statutory mootness".  This ABI article explains that the concept of statutory mootness is provided for in Sections 363(m) and 364(e) of the Bankruptcy Coe to protect capital providers, including purchasers and lenders.  It is explained that Bankruptcy Rule 8005 complements these Bankruptcy Code provisions.
Supreme Court Other articles, here  and here, review the Supreme Court denial of cert. in the case involving equitable mootness in the case of a "multi-billion dollar" Chapter 11 plan in  Law Debenture Trust Co. v. Charter Communications, Inc., No. 12-847.   In this petition for a writ of certiorari, a brief amici curiae was file by a group of law professors. The doctrine of equitable mootness as applied in the 2nd Circuit is reviewed in this article by Hunton & Williams, LLP.