국제무역
Bankruptcy and Mass Torts After Harrington v. Purdue
- In recent years, bankruptcy has been used with increasing frequency as a strategy for resolving mass-tort litigation. Its appeal for defendants lies in the potential for global resolution-the ability to address all current and future claims in a single, centralized process. A key feature facilitating this capability has been the availability of nonconsensual third-party releases. These releases allow affiliated parties that have not declared bankruptcy themselves to be released from liability without requiring the unanimous approval of all mass-tort claimants and creditors. Often, these third parties contribute substantial sums to the bankruptcy estate in return for these releases.
- The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P. has had significant implications for the use of bankruptcy as a mass-tort resolution mechanism. Although the Purdue bankruptcy ultimately reached a successful settlement following the Harrington decision, the extent to which parties can still achieve-or approximate-a global resolution in bankruptcy remains uncertain under the new legal framework. Researchers analyzed Harrington’s potential impact; in this report, they present their findings.
- The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Harrington v. Purdue Pharma L.P. has had significant implications for the use of bankruptcy as a mass-tort resolution mechanism. Although the Purdue bankruptcy ultimately reached a successful settlement following the Harrington decision, the extent to which parties can still achieve-or approximate-a global resolution in bankruptcy remains uncertain under the new legal framework. Researchers analyzed Harrington’s potential impact; in this report, they present their findings.
많이 본 자료
