By on Posted in USConstitutional mootness is a threshold question for determining whether a court has jurisdiction over an appeal. It arises from the “case or controversy” requirement under Article III of the U.S. Constitution – if no “case or controversy” exists for which the court may grant effective relief, the court lacks jurisdiction and must dismiss the appeal… Continue Reading
By Eric Daucher (US) on Posted in Bankruptcy CourtsAfter January 14’s oral argument in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, the big question appears to be not whether the Supreme Court will scale back bankruptcy court power over fraudulent transfer actions, but how drastic the new limitations will be. Our previous discussions of Arkison appear here and here. Background The facts of Arkison are… Continue Reading
By Eric Daucher (US) on Posted in USAs we discussed in a recent post on Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, the United States Supreme Court is preparing to address the constitutional limits on bankruptcy court authority in fraudulent transfer litigation. In granting certiorari in Arkison, the Supreme Court agreed to consider two questions: Can a bankruptcy court issue proposed findings of fact… Continue Reading
By Eric Daucher (US) on Posted in USOn June 24, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to hear an appeal that will determine the future of fraudulent transfer litigation before all United States bankruptcy courts. In Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, SCOTUS will determine just how much its prior decision in Stern v. Marshall limits bankruptcy court authority… Continue Reading
