Congress must be allowed“to fashion a modern bankruptcy system which places the basic rudiments of the bankruptcy process in the hands of an expert equitable tribunal.”

—from Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg, 492 U.S. 33, 94 (1989) (Blackmun dissent, emphasis added).

Justice Blackmun had a point—back in 1989—that remains true today:

When parties contract for arbitration of their disputes:

Assignment for benefit of creditors (“ABC”) laws are, historically, a debtor remedy. ABC laws are a voluntary debtor tool for shutting down and winding up the debtor’s failed business.

Ancient History

ABC laws began under the common law, back in merrie olde England, arising out of the law of trusts. Under trust law, any person can, without restriction, transfer assets into a trust for the benefit of one or more people.

An assignment for benefit of creditor (“ABC”) is, historically, a nonjudicial process for administering the affairs of a failed business. ABC laws are rooted in English common law and predate enactment of federal bankruptcy laws in the U.S.[Fn. 1]

An ABC is made by a formal, voluntary transfer of most-or-all of a business’s assets to an assignee, in trust, to apply the property or its proceeds to the payment of debts and to return any surplus to the debtor.

Following an August 11, 2022 opinion from the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, certain irrevocable surety bonds will not be considered executory contracts in bankruptcy, even when a court applies a functional multiparty approach to the traditional Countryman definition of an executory contract.

I’m on a curiosity-quest to find the first-ever U.S. Supreme Court opinion on the subject of bankruptcy.

Excitement arises, for a moment, upon discovering Gibbs v. Gibbs, 1 U.S. 371 (1788). After all, Gibbs v. Gibbs:

The crypto winter has overcast the summer for many Voyager customers. Upon the commencement of Voyager’s chapter 11 filing in July, customer accounts were frozen. Unable to trade their own crypto assets, some frustrated customers rushed to consult with legal counsel. Others began studying bankruptcy law in the hopes of finding a legal solution. It was only late last week, on August 4, when some customers found relief from the crypto storm: Judge Michael Wiles approved Voyager’s motion to allow certain customers who had cash in their accounts to withdraw cash, up to $270 million.

Here’s a hard-knocks rule for debtor attorneys:

• Never file Chapter 7 for a corporation or an LLC.

Chapter 7 has always been a grave yard for failed Chapter 11s: that’s where Chapter 11 cases go when debtors can’t get a Chapter 11 plan confirmed. For example, 35.4% of Chapter 11 cases filed between 1989 and 1995 converted to Chapter 7. [Fn. 1]

But Chapter 7 is rarely a good first-choice for corporations and LLCs who want/need to liquidate.

Every now and then we get a glimpse into the past . . . that casts light on issues and events of today.

One such glimpse is a Harvard Law Review article from 1909: “The Effect of a National Bankruptcy Law upon State Laws.”[Fn. 1]. It’s by Samuel Williston—the same Samuel Williston who authored “Williston on Contracts” and who served as professor of law at Harvard Law School from 1895 to 1938. 

Bankruptcy v. State Laws—in 1909

Following an August 4, 2022 memorandum opinion from Judge Brendan L. Shannon of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, a party to a safe harbored contract can qualify as a “financial participant” under section 546(e) of the Bankruptcy Code even where the party was not a financial participant at the time of the transaction.