Rochelle's Daily Wire

A magistrate judge decided that a bankruptcy court’s order from another district halting suits against nondebtors was unenforceable because it was not an ‘injunction’ made under Section 105(a).

The same district judge who correctly predicted that Purdue’s nonconsensual releases were prohibited has nonetheless upheld a preliminary injunction barring suits against nondebtors.

At least in New York, proceedings on a confession of judgment are neither a ‘claim’ nor a ‘cause of action’ and can’t be removed under 28 U.S.C. § 1452(a).

Bankruptcy Judge Michelle Harner decided that a mortgage servicer must allow a chapter 13 debtor’s continued use of an online payment platform.

An opinion by Bankruptcy Judge Carl L. Bucki might be read, incorrectly, to mean that Purdue precludes preliminary injunctions stopping suits against nondebtors.

The Supremacy Clause allows bankruptcy courts to set aside erroneous decisions by state courts about the applicability of the automatic stay.

The Delaware district court affirmed Bankruptcy Judge Thomas Horan, who ruled that a creditor cannot sue a chapter 15 debtor in bankruptcy court on a prebankruptcy claim.

Alter ego claims belong to the creditor, not to the bankrupt estate.

Chicago’s Bankruptcy Judge Timothy Barnes explained eight years ago why bankruptcy stays do not require personal jurisdiction, unlike injunctions in receiverships.

Fifth Circuit says that the court must have obtained personal jurisdiction over a third party in a receivership to enforce an injunction. Is the same true for the automatic stay and the discharge injunction in bankruptcy? Is there no injunction before there’s personal jurisdiction?