2022 has been a bad year for the Carolina Panthers of the National Football League:

“The [Subchapter V] Trustee shall— . . . facilitate the development of a consensual plan of reorganization.” 11 U.S.C. § 1183(b)(7).

That’s what we Subchapter V trustees are supposed to do.

Ok, fine. But how are we supposed to do that?

A facilitation tool that many Subchapter V trustees are using is this: Zoom facilitation meetings.

What follows is an explanation of how such meetings can work.

Initial Meeting

A bankruptcy discharge “does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt– . . . for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity.” 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4).

The effect of this “fiduciary capacity” statute is newly before the U.S. Supreme Court on a petition for certiorari in Spring Valley Produce, Inc. v. Forrest, Case No. 22-502.

The question presented in Spring Valley is this:

Assignments for benefit of creditors (“ABC”) are rarely used in these United States. That’s for two reasons: (i) some states have no ABC statute and do not recognize the common law of ABCs, and (ii) other states have onerous ABC statutes that no one wants to use.

The State of Illinois is an exception: ABCs are regularly and frequently used there, under the common law of trusts, because the ABC process is an efficient and effective tool for liquidating a failed or failing business. There is no ABC statute in Illinois.

Every now and then we get a bankruptcy opinion declaring a rule with broad application that, (i) may make sense is specific situations, but (ii) is a terrible result for others.

Here’s an Exhibit A opinion for such a proposition: Reinhart Foodservice LLC v. Schlundt, Case No. 21-cv-1027 in the U.S. District Court for Eastern Wisconsin, (Doc. 12, issued October 27, 2022).

The Facts

Poor Chicago. 

Unlike the result for Chicago’s traffic ticket income in Fulton v. Chicago, the U.S. Supreme Court refuses to rescue Chicago in City of Chicago v. Mance (Case No. 22-268; Cert. denied, 11/21/2022).[Fn. 1]

Employment Tracker DEZEMBER 2022 DEZEMBER 2022 | EMPLOYMENT TRACKER Employment Tracker 2 Bleiben Sie mit uns auf dem Laufenden Mit unserem Employment Tracker blicken wir für Sie regelmäßig in die „Zukunft des Arbeitsrechts“! Jeweils zu Monatsbeginn stellen wir die wichtigsten für den Monat erwarteten Entscheidungen des Bundesarbeitsgerichts (BAG) und des Europäischen Gerichtshofs (EuGH) sowie sonstiger Gerichte vor. In der Ausgabe des jeweiligen Folgemonats berichten wir über die Ergebnisse.

Stay up to date with us

With our Employment Tracker, we regularly look into the "future of labour law" for you! At the beginning of each month, we present the most important decisions expected for the month from the Federal Labour Court (BAG) and the European Court of Justice (ECJ) as well as other courts. We report on the results in the issue of the following month. In addition, we point out upcoming milestones in legislative initiatives by politicians, so that you know today what you can expect tomorrow.

Employment Tracker

2

Recent decisions

Die produzierende Industrie in Deutschland wird derzeit durch massive Materialpreis- und Energiekostenerhöhungen aufgrund der mittelbaren Folgen der Corona-Pandemie, gestörten Lieferketten und dem Ukrainekrieg erheblich in Mitleidenschaft gezogen.

The manufacturing industry in Germany is currently being severely affected by massive increases in material prices and energy costs due to the indirect consequences of the Corona pandemic, disrupted supply chains and the Ukraine war.