Mass Torts

Over the past decade, companies burdened with significant asbestos and other tort liability have utilized the so-called “Texas Two-Step” strategy to separate those tort liabilities from core assets and resolve them through the chapter 11 bankruptcy process. This session will cover isolating liabilities to preserve ongoing value with mass torts and corporate side changes, and subsequent bankruptcy issues, including venue, ongoing operations, valuations and third-party releases.

The panelists will discuss the collapse of the Surfside condominium in Miami, and the resulting receivership and other disasters that have forced insolvency professionals to allocate resources, sometimes importing tort concepts.

Third-party releases are a hot topic lately, with the recent district court opinions in the chapter 11 cases of Purdue Pharma and Ascena vacating bankruptcy court confirmation orders that approved plans providing for third-party releases. Learn what the laws in various circuits have to say about permissible third-party releases, whether bankruptcy courts are deemed to have subject-matter jurisdiction and statutory authority to approve third-party releases as part of confirmation orders approving plans of reorganization, and what standards are imposed by circuit courts to determine whether a third-party release should be approved.

This panel will analyze and explore issues and obstacles faced by debtors, creditors and other interested parties in recent mass tort bankruptcy cases. Topics to be covered will include tort claimant committees and government plaintiffs, estimation and jury trials, and channeling injunctions and settlement trusts.

This panel will discuss recent developments in mass tort bankruptcy cases, including the Purdue Pharma case and the Texas Two-Step (divisive merger), as well as its viability given recent rulings, including in In re DBMP LLC and In re Aldrich Pump, which suggest that divisive mergers may be subject to challenge as fraudulent transfers or under alter-ego, successor-liability and similar doctrines. Developments in third-party releases and legislation aimed at prohibiting third-party releases and limiting forum-shopping will also be discussed.

Opioid, sexual abuse and asbestos cases have been all over the news in the last few years. This panel of experts will discuss and analyze the complex issues involved in mass tort chapter 11 cases today, including current issues involving future claims, nonconsensual releases and plan-confirmation issues.

Sponsored by Business Reorganization Committee Over the past decade, companies burdened with significant asbestos and other tort liability have utilized the so-called “Texas Two-Step” strategy to separate those tort liabilities from core assets and resolve them through the chapter 11 bankruptcy process. The “Texas Two-Step” involves a “divisional merger” permitted under the Texas Business Organizations Code and has garnered renewed national attention when it was used by Johnson & Johnson last month as the means to address tort liability arising from its talc products. Please join us for a webinar where our esteemed panelists will provide an overview of the Texas Two-Step, including key rulings, as well as important features and considerations in large tort bankruptcy cases generally, and discuss their reactions to and predictions for the J&J bankruptcy cases.

This panel will focus on the removal and consolidation of tort claims, including those against nondebtors (e.g., Imerys); the aggressive estimation of tort claims for voting purposes (e.g., PG&E and the one-dollar estimation effort); third-party releases (e.g., the effort we are likely to see in BSA to get releases for local councils); channeling injunctions outside of the asbestos context (being used increasingly, but will the bench eventually push back?); the impact of criminal proceedings on a mass tort debtor’s ability to reorganize (e.g., PG&E and some of the pharma cases); the need for multiple committees (e.g., creditors + victims in BSA; the UCC and TCC in PG&E; and the failed effort to appoint a public entities committee in cases); notice and due process issues (e.g., notice to fire victims in PG&E); proposed trust structures; class actions in chapter 11; and Garlock.