Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 09 MAY 2011

Contemplating Chapter 11 As A "Fresh Start" Consider Recent Developments In Environmental Claims Liability

Morrison Foerster
Morrison Foerster
Contributor
Morrison Foerster

Morrison Foerster

With approximately 1,000 lawyers in 19 offices, Morrison & Foerster is a preeminent global law firm...

View firm profile
Explore more from Morrison Foerster

When a company saddled with potential environmental liabilities seeks bankruptcy protection, the goals of Chapter 11—giving the reorganized debtor a "fresh start" and fairly treating similarly situated creditors—can conflict with the goals of environmental laws, such as ensuring that the "polluter pays."

United StatesInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring

When a company saddled with potential environmental liabilities seeks bankruptcy protection, the goals of Chapter 11—giving the reorganized debtor a "fresh start" and fairly treating similarly situated creditors—can conflict with the goals of environmental laws, such as ensuring that the "polluter pays." Courts have long struggled to reconcile this tension. Recent bankruptcy cases from the Southern District of New York, including last year's decision in In re Mark IV Industries,1 and the more recent bench decisions In re Lyondell Chemical Co.2 and In re Chemtura Corp.,3 evidence this ongoing balancing act.

While the Mark IV decision suggests a trend toward favoring environmental considerations by making environmental claims harder to discharge in bankruptcy, the Lyondell and Chemtura decisions appear to cut the other way, disallowing contingent environmental contribution claims. The key considerations raised by these decisions are critical in evaluating Chapter 11

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from