A representative of future claimants must meet a higher standard than disinterestedness, the Third Circuit said, but technical conflicts may not be disqualifying.

At the risk of committing error, a district judge in New York reads a third-party release to cover only derivative claims, not direct claims that a creditor may have against a nondebtor.

Judge in New Jersey explains why chapter 11 is the best alternative for a large company to deal with mass torts.

Manhattan district judge vacated confirmation of Purdue Pharma’s chapter 11 plan because the court had no statutory power to impose non-consensual releases of creditors’ direct claims against non-debtors.

Deciding to transfer venue, a North Carolina bankruptcy judge said that the debtor underwent a corporate restructuring ‘purely for the purpose of filing bankruptcy.’

Insurance coverage disputes are ‘routinely resolved in summary judgment,’ counseling against immediate withdrawal of the reference of a non-core lawsuit, district judge says.

Standing has three components: statutory standing, constitutional standing and prudential standing, Judge Thuma explains.

The Third Circuit made more rules to decide whether an insurance company can be insulated from failure-to-warn claims by the channeling injunction in a chapter 11 ‘asbestos’ plan.

Third Circuit dicta suggests that failure to create a trust is constitutionally deficient and won’t discharge claims of ‘unknown’ creditors in a chapter 11 plan.

Due process considerations persuaded District Judge Oetken to conclude that a creditor’s claims, unknown at the time, were not barred by a settlement.