Chapter 2. Invoking Bankruptcy Relief 119 264 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Under the prior Bankruptcy Act (and every Anglo-American bankruptcy law since 1543, for that matter), creditors could place a debtor into involuntary bankruptcy only on proof that the debtor had committed an “
- The situation gets a bit trickier when the creditor’s claim arises after the bankruptcy case is commenced, but prior to the conversion. The normal rule is that the date of the bankruptcy filing serves as the critical point of cleavage for claims; generally speaking, only those claims that arise prior to bankruptcy are paid in the bankruptcy case and are discharged by the bankruptcy. Postpetition claims (with a few exceptions) neither share in the bankruptcy distribution nor are affected by the bankruptcy discharge. The most important exception is for expenses of the administration of the bankruptcy case, which are afforded second priority in the bankruptcy distribution. §§ 507(a)(2)
- One of the most fundamental issues of bankruptcy policy is what sort of bankruptcy relief, if any, should be available for a particular debtor. A second question in framing a bankruptcy law is who may trigger bankruptcy relief. A third basic issue is what showing is necessary to commence a bankruptcy case. Each of these gate-keeping questions goes
- The heart of the involuntary bankruptcy rules is found in the substantive grounds for ordering bankruptcy relief. The bases upon which creditors can put a debtor into bankruptcy against its wishes define in a fundamental way the precise balance of power between the debtor and creditors, and dictate whether access to bankruptcy will be granted readily or only in extreme cases. Furthermore, the extent to which creditors have the power to choose the bankruptcy option impacts the dealings between the debtor and creditors outside of bankruptcy. The threat of involuntary bankruptcy has been described as a “fleet in being,”
- The filing of a voluntary petition has momentous and instantaneous legal consequences. Filing the petition with the bankruptcy clerk “constitutes an order for relief.” § 301 . In simple terms, this means that a full bankruptcy case begins at the instant the clerk takes the debtor’s petition and filing fee and stamps “filed” on the petition. Legally, it is exactly as if the bankruptcy judge entered an order decreeing the debtor a bankrupt and finding that bankruptcy relief should proceed.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 7. The Payment of Claims 635 375 results (showing 5 best matches)
- However, if Debtor files bankruptcy on April 1 and runs into Creditor’s car on April 2, Creditor would not have a claim in bankruptcy. Creditor’s claim now would be deemed to arise after the bankruptcy filing. The date of the bankruptcy filing serves as the point of cleavage; actions rooted in the pre-bankruptcy past are subject to the bankruptcy case, but those that are connected to the post-bankruptcy world generally are not.
- debtor, a determination that a creditor lacks a bankruptcy “claim” will be doubly disastrous. To begin with, the debtor’s obligations to the creditor will not be discharged, and thus will continue after the bankruptcy case. Nor will the creditor’s collection efforts against the debtor be stayed. The individual debtor accordingly will lose the benefit of the “fresh start” so central to bankruptcy policy. Furthermore, the obligations that the debtor owes to the “no-claim” creditor will not be reduced at all by any bankruptcy distribution. Therefore, the creditor will be able to enforce all of its legal rights against the debtor after bankruptcy. These negative consequences for an individual debtor will occur irrespective of whether the case is a liquidation or a reorganization, because in either event the human debtor continues to exist after bankruptcy.
- an individual, the effect of finding that a creditor does not have a claim depends on whether the bankruptcy case is a liquidation or a reorganization. If the case is a liquidation, the creditor will be out of luck. The creditor’s
- ” has a bankruptcy claim even if that right to payment is
- Not all “claims” are entitled to be share in the bankruptcy distribution, or to vote on a chapter 11 plan. In order to receive a bankruptcy dividend or vote on a plan, a claim also must be
- Open Chapter
Chapter 4. Jurisdiction and Procedure 315 331 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The state courts are a logical forum to decide the purely state law questions that arise in a bankruptcy case. Examples include the validity of claims lodged against the debtor’s estate, or exemptions claimed by the debtor. The state courts are a poor choice, however, to adjudge the numerous complex issues of federal bankruptcy law. An administrative agency could ably process the routine administrative matters, but might be less well-suited to preside over significant litigation. A specialized bankruptcy court would be able to develop expertise in deciding core bankruptcy issues, and could devote itself entirely to processing the immense bankruptcy case load. The difficulty for a specialized bankruptcy court, however, lies in handling litigation that is only tangentially related to the bankruptcy case. That difficulty became even more imposing after
- , Congress had only two realistic choices (or so one would have thought): (1) give Article III status to the bankruptcy judges, who then would be able constitutionally to exercise all of a pervasive, unified federal bankruptcy jurisdiction, or (2) not give the bankruptcy judges Article III status, which would necessitate dividing bankruptcy jurisdiction between the district court and the bankruptcy judges. The 1978 “solution,” in which bankruptcy judges were not given Article III status but were given all of the bankruptcy jurisdiction, was no longer possible after
- claim. The Chief Justice took a capacious view of the power of bankruptcy judges to finally adjudicate matters arising in the administration of bankruptcy cases.
- Subsection (a) of § 157 authorizes the reference of “any or all” bankruptcy cases and proceedings from the district court to the bankruptcy judges. The reference in
- Where do bankruptcy cases happen? Bankruptcy cases are filed and processed in the federal courts. The United States District Courts are vested with “original and exclusive jurisdiction of all cases under title 11.”
- Open Chapter
Chapter 6. The Trustee’s Avoiding Powers 469 402 results (showing 5 best matches)
- A primary bankruptcy policy is
- Many of the leading bankruptcy cases finding “no transfer of property” were decided before the Supreme Court’s 1999 decision in
- Bankruptcy is a collective proceeding designed to address, in an equitable manner, the special problems that exist when a debtor has multiple creditors and insufficient assets to pay all creditors in full. From the viewpoint of creditors, the underlying goals of a bankruptcy case are to deal with all creditors on an equitable basis, and to maximize the value of the estate available for distribution to the entire body of creditors. The avoiding powers of the bankruptcy trustee are designed to help implement these fundamental bankruptcy policies, by setting aside certain types of transfers that might interfere with the realization of these goals, and by recapturing the value of those avoided transfers for the benefit of the estate.
- Accordingly, several of the avoiding powers attempt to preserve the equality principle in bankruptcy by unwinding transfers that would subvert equality. For example, § 547 allows the trustee to avoid preferential transfers made shortly before the commencement of the bankruptcy case that otherwise would allow the creditor to receive more than its fair share of the debtor’s assets.
- Some types of transfers may be avoided even apart from a collective bankruptcy proceeding. The focus of these powers, then, cannot be to protect the rights of creditors as against each other, for that policy inheres only in a collective proceeding such as bankruptcy. Rather, the impetus for these non-bankruptcy avoiding powers is to ensure that the debtor deals fairly with its creditors. That concern exists in or out of bankruptcy. For over 400 years, the principal means by which the law has effectuated this policy is through fraudulent conveyance law.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 10. The Discharge 941 232 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Most discharge litigation takes place in the bankruptcy court.
- While this is good news for debtors, it is not the whole story. The Bankruptcy Code is favorable to debtors, but it is not completely one-sided. The right to a discharge and the scope of the discharge are far from absolute. The first limitation is that the discharge only applies to
- The third limitation on the scope of the discharge relates to the timing of when the debt arose. Generally, the bankruptcy filing operates as the point of cleavage: pre-bankruptcy debts are discharged, while those arising after bankruptcy are not. In chapter 7 the discharge applies to “debts that arose before the date of the order for relief under this chapter.” § 727(b) . In the typical voluntary case filed by the debtor, the order for relief is the date the original bankruptcy petition is filed. § 301 . Note that some types of claims that actually arise postpetition are deemed for bankruptcy purposes to arise prepetition, and accordingly are also covered by the discharge. § 502(f)–(i) . For example, the trustee may reject an executory contract during the bankruptcy case, giving rise to a breach of contract claim by the other party to the contract. §§ 365(g)(1) . That claim is treated as a prepetition claim in the bankruptcy case.
- Bankruptcy history illustrates that a freely available discharge is not required.
- The current Bankruptcy Code follows centuries of precedent in demanding that a debtor who seeks the privilege of a discharge in bankruptcy must not intentionally attempt to frustrate the collection efforts of creditors prior to and in that bankruptcy case. Section 727(a)(2) bars the discharge of a debtor who has made an actual fraudulent transfer of property of the debtor within a year of the bankruptcy or of property of the estate in the bankruptcy case itself. Several elements must be proven by a party objecting to the debtor’s discharge under that section.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 8. Executory Contracts and Unexpired Leases 789 208 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Under the prior Bankruptcy Act, courts understood that the proper date to use to calculate the non-debtor’s rejection claim was the
- Then, if and only if the non-bankruptcy law would give the non-debtor party an equitable remedy in the event of the debtor’s breach, bankruptcy policy must be considered to determine the ultimate effect of rejection. That is, even if the non-debtor would enjoy an equitable remedy outside of bankruptcy, they ultimately might not prevail in bankruptcy, because there may be
- As explained above, it is settled law that rejection of an executory contract gives the non-debtor party a general unsecured claim in the bankruptcy case. By a legal fiction, even though the rejection actually occurs after the bankruptcy filing, the rejection (and thus “breach”) is deemed to have occurred immediately prior to the bankruptcy filing. But how far does that legal fiction extend? Does it mean that the
- The Court then emphasized that the critical default principle of looking to the scope of rights under non-bankruptcy law to determine the extent of the enjoyment of rights in bankruptcy “
- debtor. Once a corporate debtor files bankruptcy, the bankruptcy estate succeeds to all of the corporate debtor’s assets as property of the bankruptcy estate, and the corporate debtor ceases to exist and function as an entity separate and distinct from the debtor’s bankruptcy estate. Assume, for example, that a corporate debtor files chapter 7 bankruptcy, goes out of business, and the trustee rejects a real estate lease. The leased premises will revert to the lessor—there being no one else with any possible claim to the premises. The lessor also will be left with a claim in the bankruptcy case. By contrast, an individual debtor
- Open Chapter
Chapter 1. Overview of Bankruptcy 1 388 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Bankruptcy. It is the most dreaded word in the world of commerce. But what is “bankruptcy”? The United States Constitution gives Congress the power to enact uniform laws on “the subject of bankruptcies.”
- Creditors may override an A/B/C by filing a bankruptcy case against the debtor. The making of a general assignment by the debtor is a ground for involuntary bankruptcy. § 303(h)(2) . The bankruptcy court could, however, abstain from taking the bankruptcy case and dismiss the case if it believes that doing so would better serve the interests of
- The framers of the United States Constitution had the English bankruptcy system in mind when they included the power to enact “uniform laws on the subject of
- The result was the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984 (BAFJA),
- Title 28 governs the organization of the bankruptcy courts and the jurisdiction and venue provisions applicable to bankruptcy cases. Titled “Bankruptcy Judges,” chapter 6 in §§ 151 through 158 of title 28 addresses such crucial matters as the designation of the bankruptcy courts as a unit of the district court (§ 151 ); the jurisdiction of bankruptcy judges (§ 157 , vaguely entitled “Procedures”); and bankruptcy appeals (§ 158 grants federal jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases and proceedings to the district court. Venue is covered in §§ 1408 to 1412 makes bankruptcy trustees suable and requires them to manage property in accordance with state law. Bankruptcy fees are prescribed by § 1930 . Bankruptcy rules are authorized by § 2075
- Open Chapter
Chapter 3. The Automatic Stay 235 208 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Some doubt has been expressed as to whether a bankruptcy judge, who is not an Article III judge, even has the
- The date of the bankruptcy filing serves as the point of cleavage; actions rooted in the pre-bankruptcy past are subject to the bankruptcy case, and are stayed, but those that are connected to the post-bankruptcy world are not. Courts are fond of quipping that the debtor is entitled to a “fresh start, but not a head start.”
- which circumscribed (to an unknown and much-debated extent) the scope of the Article I bankruptcy court’s constitutional powers, undercuts this settled jurisprudence, on the basis that issuing contempt orders is a fundamental aspect of the exercise of judicial power, which historically had not been part of the arsenal of the bankruptcy judge’s summary powers. If so, a bankruptcy judge would not be able to enter a final order of contempt (even civil), but must seek the district court’s blessing of the contempt order.
- One type of activity that must be stayed is the collection of prepetition debts by specific creditors. The concern is that these creditors will continue the “race of diligence” and attempt to grab part of the debtor’s assets to satisfy their claims, without going through the bankruptcy process. The concern is not with the substantive entitlements of the creditor; the claim asserted may well be valid. Rather, the problem is with the procedural means by which the creditor seeks to collect. Once the bankruptcy case is filed, the creditor’s collection efforts must be channeled through the formal bankruptcy proceeding. The creditor must go through the bankruptcy court to collect, either by filing a claim in the bankruptcy case and being paid out of the bankruptcy distribution, or by obtaining court permission to go forward with independent collection efforts.
- To illustrate, a creditor with a tort claim that arose prepetition but which has not been reduced to judgment by the time of bankruptcy still would have a claim
- Open Chapter
Chapter 5. Property of the Estate 397 203 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The presumption in chapter 7 bankruptcy cases is against a “perpetual” bankruptcy estate, in which the estate includes all property acquired by the debtor after the filing of the bankruptcy petition. Instead, the general rule is that the extent of the estate is fixed at the time of the bankruptcy filing, and that any property that the debtor acquires after filing belongs to the debtor. For individual debtors, the right to retain property acquired after bankruptcy is a cornerstone of the debtor’s fresh start.
- As a general principle, creditors should not be able to recover more assets inside a bankruptcy case than they could outside of bankruptcy, solely because of the “happenstance of bankruptcy.” Such a result would encourage forum shopping: creditors might seek recourse to bankruptcy relief solely to grab more assets, without any independent justification for the maintenance of a bankruptcy case. Furthermore, there are no evident distributive justice concerns that would warrant such a departure from non-bankruptcy norms, attainable only in the bankruptcy setting. A “bankruptcy only” rule should find support in a bankruptcy-specific policy. Congress could decide that a debtor who wanted the benefit of a discharge of debts, a radical form of relief available only in a federal bankruptcy case, would have to relinquish extra property to creditors as the
- The problems arise, though, when the debtor’s earnings do have some link to the pre-bankruptcy era as well as the postpetition world. When the postpetition earnings have a foot on both sides of the bankruptcy filing date, the challenge in applying § 541(a)(6) is one of
- A problem sometimes arises, though, in drawing the line between a “property” interest and a “priority” claim. If Peter asserts a “constructive trust” in Paula’s property, does Peter have a property right that should be honored in bankruptcy, or is Peter simply attempting to invoke state remedial law to circumvent the federal bankruptcy priority scheme in Paula’s bankruptcy case? In a leading (although arguably misguided) opinion, the Sixth Circuit refused to give effect to a constructive trust in bankruptcy, unless the trust had been decreed by a state court prior to the commencement of the bankruptcy case.
- To give a simple example, assume that Debtor files bankruptcy on April 1. Debtor is the holder of a promissory note that will mature on June 1. The Debtor’s right to be paid on the note on June 1 becomes property of the estate, even though the obligor will not have to pay the trustee until the note’s maturity date. The promise to pay the note was made before bankruptcy, and thus is property of the Debtor. Similarly, if the Debtor has an unliquidated tort cause of action against Tortfeasor on the date of bankruptcy, the right to attempt to liquidate and collect on that cause of action passes into the estate. The alleged tortious behavior against the Debtor occurred prior to bankruptcy, and thus is part of the Debtor’s asset sheet at the time of bankruptcy. A Debtor who purchases a lottery ticket on Thursday, files bankruptcy on Friday, and wins the lottery on Saturday will be disappointed to learn that his lottery ticket became property of the estate, and thus the winnings will go...
- Open Chapter
Chapter 11. REORGANIZATION Under Chapter 11 1031 273 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The 2005 Amendments added an important qualification to the general rule that votes may not be solicited before the disclosure statement is sent out. Under the new rule, an acceptance or rejection of a plan can be solicited if it complies with applicable non-bankruptcy law and is solicited
- Barry E. Adler, Financial and Political Theories of American Corporate Bankruptcy, 45 Stan. L. Rev. 311 (1993)
- John D. Ayer, Bankruptcy as an Essentially Contested Concept: The Case of the One-Asset Case, 44 S.C. L. Rev. 863 (1993)
- One uninitiated in reorganization practice might assume that routinely appointing a trustee to take the place of the existing management of the debtor would be a wise idea. After all, current management led the debtor into bankruptcy in the first place, whether by incompetence, fraud, or neglect. Is it really a sound idea to retain the very managers who were responsible for the debtor’s descent into bankruptcy, and give them the leading role in reorganizing the debtor? Furthermore, if managers know that they will not lose their jobs or control of the company if they drive the debtor into bankruptcy, might they not be encouraged
- We conclude that cross-collateralization is inconsistent with bankruptcy law for two reasons. First, cross-collateralization is not authorized as a method of post-petition financing under section 364. Second, cross-collateralization is beyond the scope of the bankruptcy court’s inherent equitable power because it is directly contrary to the fundamental priority scheme of the Bankruptcy Code.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 9. Exemptions 873 175 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The federal bankruptcy exemptions of course are not operative
- In a bankruptcy case, “[a]n exemption is an interest withdrawn from the estate (and hence from the creditors) for the benefit of the debtor.”
- These issues are more difficult than they need to be, because of two factors: (1) a last-minute compromise in connection with the passage of the Bankruptcy Code in 1978, and then (2) the convoluted 2005 amendments.
- The exemptions available to a debtor are determined as of the date of the filing of the bankruptcy petition.
- only arises because of the arguably excessive exemptions allowed by some states. If bankruptcy debtors were limited to a more modest uniform set of exemptions, debtors would not be able to progress past the “pig” stage. The National Bankruptcy Review Commission in 1997 recommended limiting debtors to a uniform set of federal exemptions,
- Open Chapter
Preface to the Fourth Edition vii 12 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Bankruptcy happens. A lot. In the year preceding the publication of this treatise, over one million new bankruptcy cases were filed in the federal courts. Bankruptcy is by far the most frequent form of federal court proceeding. About one out of 90 households in the nation filed bankruptcy last year; in some areas, the ratio was closer to one out of 25. Bankruptcy court is the forum in which financially distressed consumers, celebrities, family farmers, agribusinesses, partnerships, small businesses, and huge multinational corporations attempt to address and resolve their difficulties. A student graduating from law school today is virtually certain to encounter the specter of bankruptcy in their legal career.
- Many lawyers and law students have perception that bankruptcy law is a narrow and difficult “specialty.” Perhaps the “difficult” part is on target, although this book is intended to unveil at least some of the mysteries of bankruptcy law. Nothing could be further from the truth, though, than to think of bankruptcy law as “narrow” in its focus. Indeed, bankruptcy may be the last haven for the legal generalist. The whole panorama of the law flashes through the bankruptcy arena. Issues involving contracts, sales of goods, real property, personal property, taxes, leases, mortgages, security interests, labor, pensions, torts, products liability, environmental concerns, alimony and support, and even the Constitution arise under bankruptcy’s broad umbrella.
- When I published the first edition of this treatise in 1997, bankruptcy had eclipsed its legal boundaries and had become a social and cultural phenomenon. In the dozen years since, that trend has become even more pronounced and entrenched. Bankruptcy is in the news on a daily basis. In the wake of the cataclysmic worldwide economic collapse in the fall of 2008, “bankruptcy” is a word known (and feared) universally. Not since the Great Depression came crashing down almost 80 years ago has the world experienced such a financial disaster. Bankruptcy is the principal legal mechanism through which the fallout from such economic calamity is handled, whether it be Lehman Brothers addressing over $600 billion in debts, United Airlines trying to salvage its business, or our individual friends, relatives, and neighbors seeking refuge in bankruptcy court. Over one million new bankruptcy cases are filed every single year, and that number is rapidly increasing. It is a virtual certainty that...
- The goal of this book remains the same as in the first edition: to explain and explore in depth in a single volume both the basic principles and the nuances of the bankruptcy law in the United States. That law is extraordinarily complex, and became even more so with the enactment of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, a bill over 500 pages long, which amended the existing Bankruptcy Code in myriad ways. This Second Edition analyzes the many changes effected by BAPCPA, while carrying forward the fundamental explanations of the core principles of United States bankruptcy law. This book is intended to serve as a primary and comprehensive resource on bankruptcy law for law students, law professors, attorneys, and judges.
- This book undertakes in a single volume to explain and explore the basic principles and the nuances of bankruptcy law in the United States. It is intended to be a resource for students taking any law school course, basic or advanced, involving bankruptcy. The book also is written so that attorneys and judges may obtain insights into the operation of the bankruptcy law. A law student should be able to use this treatise in his or her legal career. I have found the study of bankruptcy law to be endlessly fascinating and challenging; in this book I have tried to share some of my discoveries.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 12. Individual Debt Adjustments Under Chapter 13 1207 85 results (showing 5 best matches)
- As in any other type of bankruptcy case, creditors in chapter 13 are stayed from attempting to collect their debts from the debtor, the debtor’s property, or property of the estate during the case. § 362(a) . The § 362(a) stay, however, only applies to protect the debtor. A person who is liable with the bankruptcy debtor, i.e., a
- To prevent such tactics in chapter 13 cases, Congress enacted the “codebtor stay” in § 1301. The codebtor stay prevents creditors from attempting to collect a consumer debt from an individual who is a codebtor with the bankruptcy debtor during the pendency of the bankruptcy case. § 1301(a) . Relieved of the indirect threat of collection from the codebtor, the bankruptcy debtor can deal with that creditor on the same basis as other creditors, obtaining a more complete fresh start. The codebtor obviously benefits from the § 1301 stay, but this protection is an incidental by-product of the congressional attempt to provide full protection for the bankruptcy debtor.
- For example, in 2019, there were 718,553 non-commercial bankruptcy petitions filed. See
- Also, Congress added a requirement that before individual consumer debtors can be eligible to file bankruptcy at all, they must obtain financial counseling. § 109(h). Part of the thinking was that upon being counseled, many debtors would select chapter 13 instead of chapter 7. Interestingly, the “Bankruptcy Basics” materials available on the United States Courts website contains a separate section for “Advantages of Chapter 13” under chapter 13 materials, while the chapter 7 section contains an “Alternatives to Chapter 7” section instead, further highlighting advantages of chapter 13. United States Courts, Bankruptcy Basics,
- may make a recent bankrupt a safer credit risk than a debtor who is free to file bankruptcy and receive a discharge at any time. Finally, only the naive or quaintly moralistic would consider the so-called “stigma”
- Open Chapter
Chapter 13. Family Farmer Debt Adjustments Under Chapter 12 1287 14 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Bankruptcy Judges, United States Trustees, and Family Farmer Bankruptcy Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99–554, 100 Stat. 3088 (1986).
- Congress added chapter 12 to the Bankruptcy Code in 1986 as a temporary emergency chapter to provide relief to family farmers.
- It is important to remember that bankruptcy is a purely voluntary remedy for farmers. § 303(a) . Creditors are barred not only from filing an involuntary case against a family farmer under chapter 12, but also from filing involuntary bankruptcy against a farmer or family farmer under
- Family farmers are permitted to keep their land and fishermen are permitted to keep the property used in their fishing operation if they make payments under a three-to-five year plan. By enacting chapter 12, Congress continued its long history of special bankruptcy treatment for farmers. The most prominent previous examples of farm-bankruptcy legislation were the Frazier-Lemke Acts of the Great Depression.
- ) by providing for the inclusion in the bankruptcy estate of property acquired by the debtor and the debtor’s earnings from services during the pendency of the chapter 12 case. § 1207(a) that the bankruptcy estate does not include postpetition property.
- Open Chapter
Acknowledgments to the Fifth Edition xv 2 results
- This Fifth Edition, like the Fourth, has benefited greatly from my association with the law firm Foley & Lardner LLP. I have had the chance to work with and learn from numerous members of the firm’s Bankruptcy Practice Group, and I could not possibly name everyone who has enhanced my knowledge of the intricacies and workings of our bankruptcy law. In particular, though, I want to thank Jill Nicholson, my former student at Illinois, who first brought me to Foley while she headed the Bankruptcy Group, and Geoffrey Goodman (also a former student) and John Melko, who currently co-chair the firm’s bankruptcy practice. I also am very fortunate to be able to work with Rosemary Janczak, my Administrative Assistant at Foley.
- As in the Second, Third, and Fourth Editions, I again owe a substantial debt to my friend, former student, colleague, and co-author, Professor Ralph Brubaker of the University of Illinois College of Law. Ralph and I will have published five editions of a casebook on bankruptcy law, and in this Fifth Edition I again have drawn on the many insights that Ralph and I have jointly developed in writing our casebook and the accompanying teacher’s manual. I also am grateful to another friend, former student, and colleague, Professor Robert Lawless of the University of Illinois College of Law, whose expertise in bankruptcy law has been enormously helpful.
- Open Chapter
Acknowledgments to the Fourth Edition xvii 7 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Another debt in this Fourth Edition goes to the American Bankruptcy Institute and its Executive Director, Samuel Gerdano. In 2014, I was fortunate to spend a semester as the Scholar in Residence for the ABI, and in that position had the opportunity to meet and work with brilliant bankruptcy practitioners, judges, and scholars from around the world.
- In the Acknowledgments to the First Edition, I spoke of the fact that I began that work in the “latter days of the Bush Administration.” Little did I know then that there would be a second “Bush Administration”—and that this Second Edition would not be completed until after the second President Bush left office. Much has happened in the world of bankruptcy law since the publication of the First Edition in 1997, the most notable event being, of course, the enactment of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. This Second Edition, finished in the late winter of 2009, completely revises and updates the First Edition, taking into account not only BAPCPA but also a dozen years of case law developments. As this book goes to press, the United States is suffering from its most cataclysmic economic collapse since the Great Depression. Bankruptcy, unfortunately, is a very timely and important topic. Legislative initiatives to further revise the bankruptcy law are...
- As in the Second and Third Editions, I again owe a substantial debt to my friend, former student, colleague, and co-author, Professor Ralph Brubaker of the University of Illinois College of Law. Ralph and I have published four editions of a casebook on bankruptcy law, and in this Fourth Edition I again have drawn on the many insights that Ralph and I have jointly developed in writing our casebook and the accompanying teacher’s manual. I also am grateful to another friend, former student, and colleague, Professor Robert Lawless of the University of Illinois College of Law, whose expertise in bankruptcy law has been enormously helpful.
- As in the Second Edition, I owe a huge debt to my friend, former student, colleague, and co-author, Professor Ralph Brubaker of the University of Illinois College of Law. Ralph and I have published together three editions of a casebook on bankruptcy law, and in this Third Edition (as in the Second), I have drawn generously on the many insights that Ralph and I have jointly developed in writing our casebook and the accompanying teacher’s manual. I also am grateful to another friend, former student, and colleague, Professor Robert Lawless of the University of Illinois College of Law, whose expertise in bankruptcy law has been enormously helpful.
- I owe a huge debt to my friend, former student, colleague, and coauthor, Professor Ralph Brubaker of the University of Illinois College of Law. Ralph and I have published together two editions of a casebook on bankruptcy law, and in this Second Edition I have drawn generously on the many insights that Ralph and I have jointly developed in writing our casebook and the accompanying teacher’s manual. I also am grateful to another friend, former student, and colleague, Professor Robert Lawless of the University of Illinois College of Law, whose expertise in bankruptcy law has been enormously helpful.
- Open Chapter
Preface to the Fifth Edition v 3 results
- The goal of this book remains the same as in the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Editions: to explain and explore in depth in a single volume both the basic principles and the nuances of the bankruptcy law in the United States. That law is extraordinarily complex. This book is intended to serve as a primary and comprehensive resource on bankruptcy law for law students, law professors, attorneys, and judges.
- This economic apocalypse has already claimed numerous prominent victims: in just the last few weeks, legendary retailers Neiman Marcus, Brooks Brothers, J. Crew, Pier 1 Imports, and J.C. Penney have filed bankruptcy, as have Gold’s Gym, Diamond Offshore Drilling, and rental car giant Hertz, among others. More certainly will follow in short order. Before life returns fully to normal it is likely that millions of individuals will have gone bankrupt.
- Almost a quarter century has passed since I published the First Edition of this treatise in 1997. Today, more than ever, the central importance of the bankruptcy law to our economy and our national life is manifest. I write this Preface in my home study; I have been quarantined for four months (and counting) due to the worldwide Covid-19 pandemic. The pandemic and the health measures taken by governments around the world to combat it have precipitated an economic crisis unimagined since the Great Depression. An astonishing 39 million jobs have been lost in the United States alone just since the pandemic hit a few months ago.
- Open Chapter
Table of Contents 28 results (showing 5 best matches)
Index 1363 237 results (showing 5 best matches)
Summary of Contents 8 results (showing 5 best matches)
Table of Other Statutes 1359 9 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Publication Date: October 22nd, 2020
- ISBN: 9781642420630
- Subject: Bankruptcy/Creditors' Rights
- Series: Hornbooks
- Type: Hornbook Treatises
- Description: This comprehensive text provides an exhaustive analysis and discussion of every aspect of bankruptcy law, including an overview of bankruptcy; invoking bankruptcy relief (with a very detailed explanation of the means test); the automatic stay; jurisdiction and procedure; property of the estate; trustee's avoiding powers; payment of claims; executory contracts and unexpired leases; exemptions; discharge; reorganization under Chapter 11; debt adjustments under Chapter 13; debt adjustments under Chapter 12; and cross-border cases under Chapter 15. The 2005 BAPCPA amendments and the extensive case law thereunder are explained and critiqued. All legislation through the spring of 2020 is discussed, including the 2019 SBRA and the 2020 CARES Act. All relevant Supreme Court cases through the 2020 Term are discussed in depth.