Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Quality, Not Quantity: The Implications of Redefining Insurance Neutrality in In Re Global Industrial Technologies, Inc. Cover

Quality, Not Quantity: The Implications of Redefining Insurance Neutrality in In Re Global Industrial Technologies, Inc.

By:   
Open Access
|Jan 2012

Abstract

On May 4, 2011, in In re Global Industrial Technologies, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that non-creditor insurance companies had standing to challenge a debtor’s Chapter 11 plan of reorganization. In so holding, the court redefined the concept of insurance neutrality. Whereas typically the court examines the text of a plan to determine its effects on an insurer’s rights, Global Industrial Technologies suggests that insurance neutrality in a masstort liability context depends on any post-petition increase in claims asserted. This Comment argues (1) that the new quantitative measure adopted by the court is an ineffective measure of insurance neutrality and (2) that the court should not rely on a third party to protect the integrity of the bankruptcy process, but should assume that responsibility itself through its sua sponte right to intervene.

Journal eISSN: 1930-661X
Language: English
Page range: 345 - 358
Published on: Jan 1, 2012
Published by: Boston College Law School
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2012 Jennifer Kent, published by Boston College Law School
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.