US Supreme Court Docket
Travelers Indemn. Co. v. Bailey
Bankruptcy Law, 11 U.S.C. section 524
Whether the court of appeals erred in categorically holding that bankruptcy courts do not have jurisdiction to enter
confirmation orders that extend beyond the "res" of a debtor's estate, despite this
Court's recent ruling that "[t]he Framers would have understood that laws 'on the
subject of Bankruptcies' included laws providing, in certain respects, for more than
simple adjudications of rights in the res," Central Virginia Community College v.
Katz, 546 U.S. 356, 370 (2006), and whether the court of appeals compounded this
(a) failing to apply as written a federal statute (11 USC §§ 524(g) and (h)), by
limiting the scope of relief in a manner that is contrary to the express terms and
purposes of that statute;
(b) failing to give effect to the Supremacy Clause and holdings of this Court that
federal bankruptcy relief cannot be overridden by rights alleged to have been
created under state law; and
(c) failing to respect important principles of finality and repose, and the express
provisions of §524(g), by failing to approve a federal court's enforcement of a
confirmation order that was affirmed over two decades ago on direct appeal.
- U.S. Court of Appeals - 2nd Circuit, Opinion Filed: February 15, 2008
- Docket Sheet from the U.S. Supreme Court.
Jacob C. Cohn
To view PDF files listed on this page you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader