Talk:Chapter 11, Title 11, United States Code

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Law (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Stats dates[edit]

If current year stats are going to be given, the actual stats date should also be provided. RedWolf 06:36, Nov 22, 2003 (UTC)

Chapter numbers[edit]

This is chapter 11 and I see articles for 7 and 13, but why is there no chapter 9?? Georgia guy 17:42, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

If you've got an idea for an article on Chapter 9 then by all means, please create one! (This coming from a practitioner that has never seen a real live one but would like to) Flawiki 01:50, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

http://www.wefreedebt.com

Contrast with Europe[edit]

Request: I'd love for a knowledgeable person to compare and contrast Chapter 11 with the bankruptcy practices in Europe. I believe I've heard that there have been protests to the WTO that the US is sheltering its businesses from fair competition because Chapter 11 is allegedly excessively lenient compared to European bankruptcy law. Tempshill 20:57, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Airline industry[edit]

"All airline analysts agree that the United States airline industry's unprofitability (as a whole) is due to excess seat capacity, and that the solution is for at least two major airlines to be allowed to perish. However, the rules for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy make this an unlikely outcome."

I have decided to delete these sentences. Saying that all airline analysts agree on this is simply untrue. Many analysts says that it is some legacy airline's high costs compared with newer Low Coast Airlines that contribute to the industry's profit problems.


I agree with the above striking of that all industry analysist agree about excess seating capacity. Loss-leader pricing is what's causing the implosion of the airlines. And loss-leader pricing is king in the airline industry because ticket prices have to keep coming down in accordance with middle-class income. So really, as usual, the airlines are proving to be the usual "economic indicators" they've been historically and a testament to the health of our people.
Moving on; I deleted the section on how important 11 is for airlines in-that it helps them defer airplane lease payments. Payments on their equipment pails in comparison to the fear in airline managements eyes when they see they actually have to live up to the terms of a labor contract they signed last year. Then comes fuel. Equipment leasing is not of such high importance that it deserves comment in this article.--XB70Valyrie (talk) 06:09, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Bankruptcy Wide Wikipedia Reorganization Suggestion[edit]

Because there is substantial overlap between all of the bankruptcy chapters, perhaps we could place the relevant parts of the general provisions (essentially everything in chapters 1, 2, 3, and 5) into the main U.S. Bankruptcy article, and put the specific provisions about each chapter (11, 13, 15, and 9) into their own respective sections. Is there support for this? LH 05:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization[edit]

I checked the wikipedia style manual and I'm still uncertain. In legal writing the word "chapter" is not capitalized in reference to bankruptcies. It's "the company is restructuring under chapter 11" not "the company is restructuring under Chapter 11." However, in some business writing the C is capitalized. That said, can someone point me, or others, to a style reference. If one doesn't exist, perhaps one should be created.LH 02:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The statistics for Business chapter 13 filings are misleading[edit]

I briefly scanned the source that was cited for the bankruptcy filing statistics in 2003 and 2004. Although the source does use the term Business filing and lists the quoted numbers for Chapter 13 business debtors, the fact is that businesses are not eligible to file for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 13. Chapter 13 is solely for individuals. I couldn't figure out what Business filings meant in the context of the source document, but I think that the Chapter 13 statistics to business filings should be removed as they incorrectly imply that a business debtor can file for bankruptcy protection under Chapter 13. Please clarify the statistics for me or correct me if I'm wrong. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.68.76.226 (talk) 02:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge from Section 1110[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result was merge into Chapter 11, Title 11, United States Code. -- Debate 15:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that one section of Chapter 11 needs its own article, so therefore I propose that the Section 1110 page be merged here. Any thoughts? --Eastlaw (talk) 10:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree completely.LH (talk) 02:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I am removing the seven month old merger tags as stale. As the merger is clearly not controversial, I'd suggest that anyone who is willing to put a little bit of effort in should simply go ahead and do it. Debate 15:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, the other article is so small I'll be bold and do it myself... Debate 15:20, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Filing Court District for Washington Mutual bankruptcy[edit]

[1] - the source for the bankruptcy top 15 list - doesn't make mention of the filing court district for the Washington Mutual bankruptcy (or any other, for that matter). Any ideas? TerraFrost 17:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

It is in Delaware--Judge Walrath. Judge Walrath is one of the two pre-extension members of the Delaware Bankruptcy Court. LH (talk) 02:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

First paragraph seems focussed on chapter 7, not chapter 11[edit]

Reading through the first paragraph, it seems like all the information you get about chapter 11 (the subject of the article) is "it's a form of bankruptcy", whereas the bulk of the paragraph talks about what appears to be chapter 7. Perhaps the paragraph is misworded or perhaps the focus of the paragraph is wrong, but from a newcomer's perspective, it seems off. Ordinarily, I'd try to fix it myself, but I don't have the technical knowledge to really do adequate job of re-working that paragraph. William McVey (talk) 16:01, 14 November 2008 (UTC) William McVey

Yeah, definitely wrong. Looks like the defs for 7 and 11 got merged together by mistake. While I don't have much technical knowledge either, I'm going to take a crack at it. It could hardly be made worse. Mkcmkc (talk) 14:02, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Does not follow[edit]

I'm reading the "Details" section, where there is a brief statement about creditors being heard, compliance with bankruptcy law, fair and equitable treatment.

Immediately following this, the article begins talking about executory contracts, with no warning that contracts might be disputed in bankruptcy. While I actually expect that they will be, I have no idea who disputes what, and why, as it pertains to contracts, so I am wholly unprepared for a narrower discussion of executory contracts. The discussion goes on to mention "rejecting", but I don't know what is under consideration for acceptance/rejection. The bankruptcy itself? The execution of the contract?

DudeFromWork (talk) 00:42, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Good point. I'll try to fix it. LH (talk) 19:16, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


Implication of Automatic Stay to customer warranty?[edit]

I recently made a major purchase from a company that later went into Chapter 11. The product was in gross exception to the guarantee of the warranty, and I think it would be a tremendous interest to readers of this article what the implication of Chapter 11 is to their warranty. It's obvious that a lawsuit is going to be postponed until emergence, but what happens to the warranty then? Garykempen (talk) 16:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Rename: Title 11, Chapter 11[edit]

Shouldn't this article really be called "Title 11, Chapter 11, United States Code". The bankruptcy code is Title 11. Then, the code is broken into various chapters (see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode11/usc_sup_01_11.html). I think it's confusing to people if the less relevant part (the chapter) is listed before the title. Jeff Carr (talk) 20:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting point. I'm unaware if any other topics have similar naming conventions. Title 11, Chapter 11, United States Code doesn't exist (right now), and that should redirect here, or, as you say, this should redirect there. I would ask at WP:Signpost, and if that answer isn't satisfactory maybe to RfC. It's a good point, but it will affect a lot of articles, so it's worth getting right. LH (talk) 06:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Title 11 of the United States Code - Bankruptcy[edit]

this section is confusing to me Full Decent (talk) 14:14, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

In popular culture[edit]

Some people, especially non-US residents, notice jokes pertaining to chapter 11 in popular media and wonder what the joke is about. Maybe we should create a new page or a section in the current one to explain the reason for this being used as a synonym for bankruptcy in the media? (ex. Spaceballs) Dudyk (talk) 08:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Section 363[edit]

I am requesting information on Section 363 of Chapter 11. This was used by General Motors. Full Decent (talk) 17:57, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

363 is a big section. You're referring to 363(f), also known as "free and clear" sales. They're not unique to chapter 11, although they are certainly the most important in chapter 11s. We don't have very much information on that provision. I might add some in if I get some time. It probably should be a part of the main Bankruptcy in the United States article and not the chapter 11 one specifically. LH (talk) 17:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Largest bankruptcies (Table)[edit]

The list of lagest bankruptcies needs some help. Companies go bankrupt due to lack of assests (as compared to debt) so just listing their assets at time of death isn't very meaning full.

Sugestions I have are

Company Bankruptcy date Total Assets pre-bankruptcy Total assets pre-bankruptcy at today's value, Assets above debt Filing court district
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. 2008-09-15 $639,063,000,800 $702 billion 4.078314657553% NY-S

Or List debts and asets

Company Bankruptcy date Total Assets pre-bankruptcy Total assets pre-bankruptcy at today's value, Total Debts pre-bankruptcy Total debts pre-bankruptcy at today's value, Filing court district
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. 2008-09-15 $639,063,000,800 $702 billion $613 billion $674 billion NY-S

Larek (talk) 17:14, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

"First day motion"[edit]

I'm looking at an article that mentions a company's "first day motions", which as in this comment, is currently a redlink.

I can see why the link is there, since I wasn't sure what a first day motion was either and would have found it useful if the link was active. Poking around the net, I found a source that says a first-day motion is

A request to a US bankruptcy court made on the first day following a borrower's filing for chapter 11 bankruptcy. First-day motions typically deal with matters that will allow the company entering bankrutpcy to continue to operate by providing court consent to matters such as payment of suppliers.

This article seems like the most likely home for this information.

What I'd like to do is create the redirect first-day motion pointing to someplace in this article (and of course correct the punctuation in the original article), but I don't consider myself a SME on Chapter 11 bankruptcy, nor am I sure the above source is considered sufficiently reliable. Would anyone like to assist or even "just do it" ? Thanks, NapoliRoma (talk) 22:06, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Need to add Bildisco decision and the legislation passed to reverse that decision[edit]

That decision voided a CBA but Congress slammed the court by reversing that decision by added!Lingust (talk) 03:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)e

Still biased towards US[edit]

We have Chapter 11 in other countries too, you know. Unfortunately IANAL so I'm not qualified to fix the article. 90.199.75.119 (talk) 02:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)