Trial by Jury: Why It Matters in a Democratic Society
Waldman: Stop Immunizing Websites That Allow Harassment
Busy Days For Voting Rights Advocates, Thanks to SCOTUS
A Moment of Simple Justice - Snitching Ain't Easy
Fighting for Education Rights: Equal Justice for Pregnant and Parenting Students
Combining Arms for Justice-Involved Veterans
A Moment of Simple Justice - Cameras on Cops
A Moment of Simple Justice - Ferguson
A Moment of Simple Justice - Revenge Porn
Schoenbrod: SCOTUS Ruling Helps EPA Deal With a "Stupid Statute"
SOX Whistleblower Protections Extend to Private Companies: Critical Steps to Take Now
A More Perfect Union: Why Punish Russia for Crimea?
Jail Time for Revenge Porn Offenses?
End Game in the Fight Over Same Sex Marriage?
Is Punishment Dead in America?
Bill on Bankruptcy: Detroit Falls Short on Good-Faith Test
Bill on Bankruptcy: Madoff Victims Rooting for Stanford Victory
Bill on Bankruptcy: Listening in the Dark at the NCBJ
Health Care Antitrust & the Supreme Court – Interview with Bruce Sokler, Member, Mintz Levin
Bill on Bankruptcy: Detroit Shows Need for Amending Bankruptcy Law
On December 8, 2014, the American Bankruptcy Institute (ABI) Commission to Study the Reform of Chapter 11 published a 400-page report containing far-reaching recommendations. The report is the result of a three-year study...more
The bankruptcy bench and bar breathed a sigh of relief when the Supreme Court issued Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison (In re Bellingham Insurance Agency, Inc.), No. 12-1200 (June 9, 2014) (“Bellingham”). Its...more
In Stern V. Marshall, ____ U.S ___, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011), the Supreme Court held that bankruptcy courts cannot issue final judgments on state law counterclaims even though they are “core proceeding”. Stern V. Marshall is...more
As we all know, on June 9 of this year, the Supreme Court issued its long awaited decision in Executive Benefits Ins. Agency vs. Arkison, 134 S. Ct. 2165, 189 L. Ed. 2d 83 (2014), which we had hoped would resolve the open...more
On August 11, Franklin Funds and Oppenheimer Rochester Funds filed a second amended complaint, opposition to motion to dismiss and cross-motion for summary judgment in the litigation they previously filed in the United States...more
The Beverly Hills Bar Association’s Bankruptcy Section recently held a program discussing the three recent bankruptcy-related Supreme Court decisions: Law v. Siegel (a case regarding surcharge, which was discussed on this...more
With all attention focused on Executive Benefits, the Daimler decision could represent the real sea change in jurisdiction over non-core actions.
Recently, much of the bankruptcy bar was focused...more
The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority (PREPA) yesterday filed separate motions to dismiss the federal court complaint filed last month by some PREPA bondholders seeking to invalidate the...more
In a rare burst of bankruptcy enthusiasm, the US Supreme Court in June issued two decisions on matters important to the administration of bankruptcy cases.
In re Bellingham, decided June 9, addressed a seemingly...more
As we noted last month, the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, Case No. 12-1200, 573 U.S. ___ (2014), affirmed the constitutional authority of bankruptcy courts to issue...more
As spring rolls into summer, bankruptcy practitioners await the Supreme Court’s decision in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkinson. With the Supreme Court’s term ending June 30, 2014, some wonder if the Court will,...more
On June 19, 2014 the Supreme Court of the United States in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, 134 S. Ct. 2165 (2014) affirmed and clarified its prior decision in Stern v. Marshall, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011) which...more
As a result of two Federal trial court decisions issued May 19, 2014 and May 20, 2014, Oregon and Pennsylvania became the 18th and 19th states where gay and lesbian couples can legally marry. In these decisions, U.S....more
On June 9, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued the decision Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkinson, Trustee of the Estate of Bellingham Insurance Agency, Inc., which deals with the constitutional limits on...more
The filing of a bankruptcy petition creates a bankruptcy estate that includes “all legal or equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the commencement of the case.” Highland Capital Mgmt. LP v. Chesapeake Energy...more
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to take up an appeal brought by Irving Picard, the court-appointed bankruptcy trustee charged with recovering assets on behalf of Madoff’s bankruptcy estate and distributing them to...more
The Supreme Court has spoken once again on the limited jurisdiction of the bankruptcy courts, adding to the understanding derived from Northern Pipeline Constr. Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co., 458 U.S. 50 (1982),...more
Bankruptcy courts have jurisdiction over "core" and "non-core" proceedings. See 28 U.S.C. § 157. In "core" proceedings, bankruptcy courts can enter final judgments. See 28 U.S.C. § 157(b). In "non-core" proceedings, however,...more
In its recent decision, Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison (In re Bellingham Insurance Agency, Inc.), the Supreme Court reiterated and expanded on the reasoning in Stern v. Marshall and made clear that a...more
On June 9, the Supreme Court held that a bankruptcy judge may submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law for review by a federal district court in otherwise “core” adversary proceedings where a non-debtor party...more
A unanimous Supreme Court, in Executive Benefits Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Arkinson (In re Bellingham Ins. Agency, Inc.), 573 U.S. ___ (2014), confirmed a bankruptcy court’s power to submit proposed findings of fact and...more
Voss v. Knotts et al. -
In a concise, unpublished decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants in a copyright suit on the...more
On Monday, the United States Supreme Court decided in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison that while bankruptcy courts do not have the power to make final decisions on so-called "Stern claims," they can try or...more
In the first six months of 2014 the Supreme Court has already issued two opinions concerning the authority of the bankruptcy courts. The first opinion, Law v. Siegel, 134 S. Ct. 1188 (2014), was issued in March. In Law,...more
In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Stern v. Marshall, 131 S.Ct. 2594. In Stern, the Court was faced with the question of whether the Bankruptcy Court had statutory and Constitutional authority to decide a counterclaim...more
Find a Constitutional Law Author »
Back to Top