Federal Statutes
- 11 U.S.C. §§ 101–1532 (Full scope of the Bankruptcy Code)
- This is the subsection of the US Code known as the Federal Bankruptcy Code, in particular, chapter 11 reorganizations are covered in §§ 1101-1195, which this research guide focuses on. The general provisions(§§ 101-112) cover the definitions, key terms, and the general grants of power given to the Bankruptcy Courts. §§ 301-366 pertain to the general administration of bankruptcy court filings, and details such as the autmatic stay, voluntary and involuntary bankruptcy filings, use of property, and creditor's meetings. §§ 501-562 governs claims, priorities, dischargable debts, executory contracts, and secured transactions.
- Key sections:
- Here are some key sections to familiarize yourself with before diving into any chapter 11 restructuring issue:
- § 105 (Grant of Powers)
- 105 is an important section to be aware of as it grants the Federal Bankruptcy Courts their broad equitable powers necessary to issue judgments and decress necessary to carry out the goals of the court.
- § 362 (Automatic Stay)
- The automatic stay is also another provision to be aware of, as it serves as the primary injunction that puts a hold on all creditors abilities to go after the debtor seeking releif while the bankruptcy proceedings initiate.
- § 364 (Debtor in Possession)
- The term "debtor in possession" or often abbreviated as DIP, is referred to often in chapter 11 reorganizations, given that the debtor serves as a debtor in possession, meaning they keep their assets during the bankruptcy proceeding in order to maintain their business while slowly paying back debtors. The idea behind this is that a business alive is more valuable than when its dead, and this serves the current employees by avoiding layoffs, and continuing to allow revenue to flow into the business to be used to pay creditors.
- § 365 (Executory Contracts)
- One of the more complicated areas of bankruptcy, executory contracts pertain to agreements where both parties still have outstanding obligations that have not bee performed, and whether to assume (continue) or terminate (reject) those obligations as seems fit to the bankruptcy estate.
- § 503 (Administrative Expenses)
- Administrative expenses can be defined as necessary costs needed to preserve the bankruptcy estate, such as employee wages, professional fees for attorneys, post-petition goods and services, etc., and often qualify for priority treatment in chapter 11 cases.
- § 507 (Priority Claims)
- § 507 establishes the priority rankings of individual claims. "Priority" is a term used often in the practice of bankruptcy and secured transactions, and means exactly how it sounds; which creditor is first in line to collect on their claims. For example, domestic obligations such as child support and alimony and related obligations are often given the highest priority due to their importance as a matter of policy.
- § 541 (Property of the Estate)
- § 541 defines the actual property of the estate. This consists of all the legal and equitable interests the debtor has at the time of filing, and its determination is important to properly analyze what the best course of action and plan for the debtor's repayment of their obligations may be.
- § 1104 (appointment of a trustee)
- The "trustee" is another important player in the world of bankruptcy. In chapter 11, the debtor usually starts as a DIP, or debtor in possession, however the court has certain instances where they are needed to appoint a bankruptcy trustee to administer he estate in the event that fraud, dishonesty, incompetence, etc., is found on the part of the debtor.
- § 1107 (Debtor in Possession)
- As mentioned prior, the debtor in possesion, or DIP, simply refers to the status of the debtor in a chapter 11 filing where the debtor remains in possession and control of their bankruptcy estate in order to maintain the functionlity of their business while a repayment plan is confirmed.
- § 1129 (Plan Confirmation)
- Finally, § 1129 lays out the general requirments of the repayment plan, and must be proposed to the bakruptcy court in good faith and provide the creditors with assurances that they will be repaid as much as they could have in a chapter 7 (liquidation) proceeding. Cramdown confirmation is another area to be familiar with as it is a mechanism often used in the verification of a chapter 11 plan.
Federal Case Law
- Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp., 580 U.S. 451 (U.S., 2017)
-
In Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp., The Supreme Court reviewed a case where former employees challenged a structured dismissal of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy approved by the Delaware Bankruptcy Court. Lower courts, including the Third Circuit, upheld the dismissal. The Supreme Court ruled that:
-
The former employees had Article III standing to appeal.
-
Bankruptcy courts cannot approve structured dismissals that distribute assets in violation of the Bankruptcy Code’s priority rules unless affected creditors consent.
-
This decision reinforced the principle that bankruptcy distributions must follow statutory priorities.
-
-
- Stern v. Marshall, 564 U.S. 462 (U.S., 2011)
- In Stern v. Marshall, A widow filed an adversary proceeding in her Chapter 11 bankruptcy case, alleging that her stepson interfered with her expected inheritance. The Bankruptcy Court ruled in her favor, but the stepson appealed. The District Court upheld the ruling with modifications, leading both parties to appeal further. The Ninth Circuit vacated the decision, and after the Supreme Court initially remanded the case, the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded with instructions.
- Upon reviewing the case again, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roberts, held that the Bankruptcy Court lacked authority under Article III to issue a final judgment on the widow’s counterclaim, affirming the decision.
- Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P 603 U.S. 204 (U.S., 2024)
- In Harrington, a privately-held pharmaceutical company and its affiliates, facing mass tort litigation over their opioid pain reliever, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and sought approval of a reorganization plan. The plan included broad liability releases for non-debtor family members who were owners, directors, or officers of the company. The U.S. Trustee, multiple states, and municipalities objected.
- The Bankruptcy Court approved the plan with modifications, but the District Court vacated the confirmation order. On appeal, the Second Circuit reversed the District Court and reinstated the plan. The Supreme Court granted review after the U.S. Trustee sought a stay.
- The Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Gorsuch, held that the Bankruptcy Code does not allow courts to approve non-consensual releases that shield non-debtors from liability in a Chapter 11 plan. This ruling abrogated several prior decisions that had permitted such releases.
- Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Company Inc. 602 U.S. 268 (U.S., 2024)
-
In this case, a former manufacturer of asbestos-containing products filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and proposed a reorganization plan that included a channeling injunction and trust to handle present and future asbestos-related claims. The company’s primary liability insurer objected.
-
The Bankruptcy Court recommended plan confirmation, and the District Court adopted the recommendation. The insurer appealed, but the Fourth Circuit upheld the plan, leading to Supreme Court review.
-
The Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Sotomayor, held that an insurer with financial responsibility for a bankruptcy claim is a “party in interest” and has the right to object to a Chapter 11 plan.
-
- Fla. Dept. of Revenue v. Piccadilly Cafeterias, Inc., 554 U.S. 33 (U.S., 2008)
-
A Chapter 11 debtor sought court approval to sell most of its assets and requested an exemption from stamp taxes on the sale. The Bankruptcy Court approved the motions, but the Florida Department of Revenue (DOR) objected, arguing that $39,200 in assessed stamp taxes on certain asset transfers were not exempt under the Bankruptcy Code. The court ruled in favor of the debtor, and both the District Court and the Eleventh Circuit upheld the decision.
-
Upon Supreme Court review, Justice Thomas held that the Bankruptcy Code’s stamp-tax exemption does not apply to transfers made before a Chapter 11 plan is confirmed.
-
The ruling clarified the timing requirements for tax exemptions in bankruptcy asset sales.
-