Overview
Title
To amend title 11, United States Code, to prohibit nonconsensual release of a nondebtor entity’s liability to an entity other than the debtor, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
This bill wants to make sure that when someone owes money and goes to court to sort it out, the court can't just change or erase what other people who don't owe money have to do unless those people say it's okay. It also wants to make rules clear about who can be stopped from doing things by the court when they're not the ones who owe money.
Summary AI
H.R. 9223 aims to amend the U.S. Bankruptcy Code to prevent courts from discharging or altering the liabilities of entities that are not debtors without their consent. It also restricts courts from staying or blocking legal actions involving nondebtors unless certain conditions are met. Additionally, the bill makes provisions for dismissing bankruptcy cases involving debtor divisions or mergers, and ensures that final orders issued before the bill's enactment remain valid. The bill emphasizes the inability to imply authority for nondebtor releases or injunctions through its provisions.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Summary of the Bill
The bill titled "Nondebtor Release Prohibition Act of 2024" aims to amend the United States Bankruptcy Code by prohibiting nonconsensual releases of liability for parties other than the debtor. It seeks to ensure that in bankruptcy proceedings, only the debtor’s liabilities can be modified without consent. The bill establishes clear parameters for when a court can approve or order the discharge of a third party's liability, intending to streamline bankruptcy cases and prevent entities from circumventing their financial responsibilities through nonconsensual releases.
Significant Issues
One major concern with this bill is the complexity and density of its legal language, which could pose comprehension challenges even for legal experts. The bill's text is complex and filled with legal jargon that may be difficult for stakeholders outside the legal field to understand. For instance, terms like "entity other than the debtor" and processes relating to "nondebtor releases" might not be entirely clear without extensive background knowledge.
Additionally, the bill leaves certain terms and procedures open to interpretation, such as what constitutes "clear and conspicuous notice" or the lack of specificity around "appropriate court of appeals." These ambiguities could lead to diverse interpretations and legal disputes in practice.
Moreover, the bill aims to address divisional mergers by potentially dismissing bankruptcy cases that involve separating assets from liabilities in a deceptive manner. However, defining terms like "foreseeable effect" and "material assets" remains vague, which might hinder effective implementation.
Impact on the Public
For the general public, this bill could lead to greater transparency and fairness in bankruptcy proceedings, ensuring that only the debtor’s liabilities are addressed and not those of unrelated third parties. This might prevent entities from exploiting bankruptcy laws to absolve themselves of debts through nonconsensual releases, thereby promoting accountability.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Creditors: Creditors might view this bill positively as it could protect their interests by ensuring that they have the opportunity to pursue claims against nondebtor entities, rather than facing unilateral releases in bankruptcy proceedings.
Nondebtor Entities: On the other hand, entities that might have benefited from such releases could be negatively affected. These organizations could face increased financial liabilities, as their responsibilities would no longer be as easily discharged through another entity’s bankruptcy process.
Legal Professionals: Lawyers and bankruptcy judges might face challenges due to the bill's complexity and potential ambiguities. The need for precise legal interpretation could increase demand for expert legal advice and representation, possibly extending the time and cost associated with proceedings.
Legislators and Policymakers: The bill exemplifies a legislative effort to close perceived loopholes in bankruptcy law; however, it places additional pressure on legislators to ensure that the language and provisions are clear and enforceable, possibly requiring further amendments or clarifications in the future.
Overall, while the bill has the potential to increase fairness and transparency in bankruptcy cases, its effective application will rely heavily on precise legal interpretations and potentially additional legislative adjustments to resolve its ambiguities.
Issues
Section 2: The language used to prohibit nondebtor releases is complex and legalistic, making it difficult for the general public and even some legal professionals to fully understand the implications, potentially leading to confusion and misapplication.
Section 113: The bill's provisions may create ambiguity and varied interpretations, particularly regarding terms such as 'entity other than the debtor or the estate' and 'a claim or cause of action', which could result in legal disputes and uncertainty.
Section 3: The term 'appropriate court of appeals' introduces ambiguity as it does not specify which court is appropriate, potentially leading to confusion, legal disputes, or procedural delays within the already tight 90-day timeframe.
Section 4: The undefined terms like 'foreseeable effect', 'material assets', and 'material liabilities' in the context of divisional mergers may lead to differing interpretations, potentially allowing for misuse or unintended applications of the law.
Section 5: The 'rule of construction' provision lacks clarity on what specific court authorities are addressed and its implications on 'nondebtor releases', 'injunctions', and 'stays', potentially leading to further legal ambiguity.
Section 6: The effective date section may cause confusion due to its complex legal language, particularly regarding the terms like 'pending in bankruptcy' and 'final judgment, order, or decree', which could require additional explanations for public understanding.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of this bill officially names it the “Nondebtor Release Prohibition Act of 2024.”
2. Prohibition of nondebtor releases Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section prohibits courts from approving or ordering the release of liabilities of parties other than the debtor or their estate, with certain exceptions. It outlines specific conditions under which a court may still authorize actions affecting these liabilities, such as sales or transfers free of claims, and specifies that any temporary court orders to stop legal actions against non-debtor entities cannot last more than 90 days without consent.
113. Prohibition of nondebtor releases Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section prohibits courts from approving the discharge or modification of a nondebtor's liability in bankruptcy cases, except in specific circumstances outlined in the law. It also clarifies that courts can still authorize certain actions, like property sales or barring certain claims, if the court has that authority outside of bankruptcy rules.
3. Appeal of nondebtor stays Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends U.S. law to allow appeals courts to review orders temporarily stopping actions against non-debtors under certain bankruptcy cases, and if an appeal is made, the order will end after 90 days unless it is dismissed or upheld by the appeals court.
4. Divisional mergers Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Section 1112 of the United States Bankruptcy Code has been updated to require courts to dismiss certain bankruptcy cases if the debtor, or its predecessor, was involved in a divisional merger or similar restructuring. This applies if such a merger was intended to separate assets and liabilities in a way that leaves the debtor with substantial liabilities, and it happened within the last 10 years before filing for bankruptcy.
5. Rule of construction Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section clarifies that this Act does not give the court new powers to approve protections like releases or stays for non-debtor parties when handling Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases, nor does it suggest that any existing laws provide such authority.
6. Effective date Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Act and its amendments become effective on the date they are enacted, applying to bankruptcy cases that are already in progress, filed, or reopened at that time. However, any final judgments, orders, or decrees made before this Act's enactment remain valid and unaffected.