Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Second Circuit Allows Asbestos Claims to Proceed Against Pfizer
In September 2004, the Quigley Company, a wholly owned subsidiary of Pfizer, filed for Chapter 11 relief in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, and advised the court in its first-day filings that it intended on filing a pre-negotiated Chapter 11 plan as soon as practicable that would establish a trust and provide for channeling injunctions in favor of, among others, Pfizer, a non-debtor third party, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. ' 524. Some parties-in-interest, including an ad-hoc committee of tort claimants that had organized and appeared early in the bankruptcy case, viewed Quigley's bankruptcy filing as a carefully orchestrated scheme by Quigley to shield its non-debtor parent from substantial exposure.
Fast-forward almost eight years to April 10, 2012, when the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, agreeing with the district court and disagreeing with the Quigley bankruptcy court, concluded that in fact the channeling injunction issued in favor of Pfizer did not bar the commencement or continuation of certain asbestos actions against Pfizer. This article addresses issues that the Second Circuit considered in reaching its conclusion, including: 1) whether the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to enjoin the asbestos actions from going forward in light of the United States Supreme Court's opinion in Stern v. Marshall and under the Bankruptcy Code in general; and 2) whether the asbestos actions in question fell within the scope of the channeling injunction.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- 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
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.