Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Total Bankruptcy Filings At Mid-Year

By Adam J. Schlagman
September 28, 2004

The number of total bankruptcy petitions filed for the 12-month period ending June 30, 2004 has decreased for the first time since 2000 over this time period, according to the latest figures prepared by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. For the 12-month period ending June 30, 2004, there were 1,635,725 filings, or 14,554 fewer than the 12-month period ending June 30, 2003 when 1,650,279 petitions were filed, the record high for this time period. Although this overall decrease is fairly modest, only 0.9%, business bankruptcy practitioners should take note that business filing are off by 3.9% since mid-year 2003 and nearly 9% since mid-year 2002.

For the 3-month period ending June 30, 2004, there was a total of 421,110 bankruptcy petitions filed, the second highest total for any quarter in history and the second consecutive quarter that filings have increased. The all-time record for filings in a single quarter was set in the 3-month period ending June 30, 2003 when 440,257 filing were reported. This decrease of 4.3% from the second quarter of 2003 also follows a 1.3% decrease from the first quarter of 2003 to the first quarter of this year.

While practitioners specializing in business bankruptcy are reporting healthy workloads, the actual numbers of business filings are at their lowest point in over 10 years. In fact, since 1999, business filings for the 12-month period ending June 30 have not cracked the 40,000 filing threshold even a single time, while by comparison, business filings for this time period regularly exceeded 50,000 filings as recently as 1998.Going back slightly further, it will be seen that business filings have actually exceeded 60,000 as recently as June 30, 1993 when 66,428 business filings were reported. It should be interesting to see whether business filings are affected by any rise in interest rates that may come about in the months following the November elections.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?

Fresh Filings Image

Notable recent court filings in entertainment law.