ruling § 1112(b)’s explicit language and legislative history indicate bankruptcy court without power to dismiss sua sponte
How later courts described this case
- ruling § 1112(b)’s explicit language and legislative history indicate bankruptcy court without power to dismiss sua sponte
- holding that such a filing is permissible
- holding consumer debtors may be eligible for chapter 11 under certain circumstances
- holding individual is eligible Chapter 11 debtor
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
HILL, Circuit Judge,
specially concurring:
I concur in the judgment. I agree that the law allows this individual petition-in-bankruptcy under Chapter 11.
I do not agree with so much of the opinion as indicates that a proceeding under Chapter 11 is desirable in this situation. The petitioner has no income other than that which might be allocated to her from time to time by her husband. I seriously doubt that a bankruptcy judge can effectively deal with the petitioner and her creditors under Chapter 11.
At oral argument, it appeared that this proceeding is an inappropriate imposition upon the bankruptcy court. Counsel for the debtor indicated that commercial institutions holding secured debts would be willing to abide the orders of a bankruptcy court, but that they found it uncomfortable to agree to any moratorium or other relief on their own. If they do not oppose a moratorium, there seems to be no valid reason why private arrangements cannot be made without having them made in bankruptcy. In short, the case does not appear appropriate for Chapter 11; it may be brought there merely because the Congress said that it may.