Supreme Court

Amicus briefs are needed so the Supreme Court sees the big picture and understands that creditors can suffer if judicial estoppel is applied indiscriminately.

A Supreme Court nonbankruptcy decision means there is no right to a jury trial in the claims-allowance process in bankruptcy.

The unanimous decision on March 19 by Justice Gorsuch contains language that could be used on both sides of the argument about the validity of equitable mootness.

Any day now, the Second Circuit could create a split of circuits importuning the Supreme Court to decide whether chapter 13 trustees are paid fees even if no plan is confirmed.

The Supreme Court resolved a split of circuits in an opinion that could give support to the notion that arbitration agreements are not enforceable in bankruptcy.

The high court’s ruling on the Takings Clause also seems to mean that real estate tax foreclosures can be avoided as constructively fraudulent transfers.

Eighteenth century ‘history and tradition’ might govern the constitutionality of real estate tax foreclosures where the government retains sale proceeds in excess of unpaid taxes.

It appears as though the Supreme Court will decide Lac du Flambeau based entirely on textual analysis of Section 106(a), which does not explicitly abrogate sovereign immunity as to Native American tribes.

The opinion by Justice Barrett largely bases the outcome on the use of the passive voice in Section 523(a)(2)(A).

The high court will decide whether a real estate tax foreclosure can violate the Takings Clause and whether Section 106 abrogates sovereign immunity as to Native American tribes.