Saturday, December 1, 2012

Kane v. Johns-Manville Corp. case brief (bankruptcy)

 Kane v. Johns-Manville Corp. (2nd Cir 1988) (No standing)
Facts: Manville filed a Chapter 11 reorg. Kane and a group of 765 individuals he represented are persons with asbestos injuries who had filed PI suits against Manville prior to the Chapter 11 petition. The suits were stayed and he and others were designated as Class 4 creditors. Kane objects because: 1) it discharges the rights of future victims who do not have “claims” within §101(4), 2) it was adopted w/out constitutionally adequate notice, 3) voting procedures violated the code and due process, and 4) the plan fails to conform w/ the requirements of §1129(a) and (b).

Holding: Kane lacks sanding to challenge the plan on the grounds that it violates the rights of future claimants and other third parties, and reject on the merits his remaining claims that the plan violates his rights regarding voting and fails to meet the requirements of §1129. Affirmed the order of the confirmation of the plan.

Analysis: A court appointed legal representative negotiated on behalf of future claimants. Manville was directed to give notice to inform person with present health claims of the pendency of the reorg and their opportunity to participate. Kane can only challenge a deprivation of his own rights. He cannot make claims on third party grievances.
§524(g): 1994 amendments added “personal injury, recovery for damages allegedly caused by the presence of, or exposure to, asbestos or asbestos-containing products.”

Interested in learning how to get the top grades in your law school classes? Want to learn how to study smarter than your competition? Interested in transferring to a high ranked school?

No comments:

Post a Comment

Landmark Personal Injury Lawsuits and Their Lasting Impact

According to a Forbes article, personal injury lawsuits are civil actions brought by an injured person against the party responsible for the...