The U.S. Solicitor General wants the Supreme Court to resolve a circuit split and decide whether the increase in U.S. Trustee fees violated the Bankruptcy Clause because it was not immediately applicable in two states with bankruptcy administrators.

The bankruptcy court was accorded wide discretion in deciding how to treat a $5.2 million loan that was neither disclosed to nor approved by the bankruptcy court.

An arbitration case to be argued in November may inform bankruptcy courts whether they must enforce arbitration agreements.

The circuits are now split 2/2 on whether the 2018 increase in U.S. Trustee fees violated the Bankruptcy Clause because the increase didn’t apply immediately in bankruptcy administrator districts.

Judge Hoffman sets up Sixth Circuit to opine on the circuit split regarding the constitutionality of the 2018 increase in fees for the U.S. Trustee system.

Officers are presumptively disqualified from KERPs, “absent a strong showing that they do not perform any significant role in management,” a district judge in New York says.

Closing a chapter 11 case after confirmation to avoid U.S. Trustee fees won’t be necessary if the ruling by Judge Sontchi holds up.

An administrative creditor isn’t a ‘guarantor’ of the success of the project, Delaware’s Bankruptcy Judge Goldblatt says.

The Second Circuit split with the Fourth and Fifth Circuits by holding that the increase in fees for the U.S. Trustee system was unconstitutional because it was not imposed simultaneously in the two states with bankruptcy administrators.

Dissenters in the Fourth and Fifth Circuits evidently believe that the dual U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy Administrator system is unconstitutional.