Central Aspect of the US Model of Corporate Bankruptcy and Reorganisation - Essay Example

? Central aspect of the US Chapter 11 Model of Corporate Bankruptcy and Reorganisation. Inserts His/Her Inserts Grade Customer Inserts Tutor’s Name 11 April 2012 INTRODUCTION Chapter 11 Bankruptcy law and reorgnisation law offers a bankrupt company another lease on life under strict legal requirements. The research centers on the responsibility of the debtors in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy and reorgnisation process. The research deals with the required acts of the creditors in a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy and reorgnisation proceeding. The main purpose of the essay is to show convincing evidence that the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy and reorgnisation law can successfully breath new revenue-enhancing life to once unprofitable companies. PART I: CHAPTER 11 BANKCRUPTCY STATUTE: In term so of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy1 the influential commercial law2 process starts “with the filing of a petition with the bankruptcy court serving the area where the debtor has a domicile or residence. A petition may be a voluntary petition, which is filed by the debtor, or it may be an involuntary petition, which is filed by creditors that meet certain requirements3. A voluntary petition must adhere to the format of Form 1 of the Official Forms prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States. Unless the court orders otherwise, the debtor also must file with the court: (1) schedules of assets and liabilities; (2) a schedule of current income and expenditures; (3) a schedule of executory contracts and unexpired leases; as well as (4) a statement of financial affairs.” Further, the law indicates that the debtor is an individual (or husband and wife), there must be more document filing prerequisites4. The debtors must: file a certificate of credit counseling and a copy of any debt repayment plan crafted through credit counseling; evidence of a possible payment from employers that had been received 60 days prior to the filing; a statement of monthly net income as well as anticipated ballooning in income or expenses after the debtor’s filing; and a record of any interest that the debtor has in either federal or state qualified education or tuition accounts5. Further, a husband or wife is allowed to file a joint petition or individual petitions6. After filing the $1,000 case filing fee7, Bankruptcy Court Miscellaneous Fee Schedule, Item 8, the law also indicates the limits to only four the number of installments for the filing fee8. In addition, when filing a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11, the debtor is automatically metamorphosed as a "debtor in possession9." The term refers to a debtor who keeps possession and control of the entities’ assets during the reorganisation explained under chapter 11, without the appointment of new case trustee. The debtor in possession can run the business. The debtor remains a debtor in possession until the debtor's plan of reorganisation is approved (confirmation); the debtor's case is dismissed or converted to chapter 7, or when a chapter 11 trustee is selected. The selection of a trustee happens rarely. Normally, the debtor, as "debtor in possession," controls the entities’ operations and implements many acts of the job responsibilities that a trustee sets into motion in cases under other chapters10. Further, the contents of the plan must include a classification of claims and should indicate how each class of claims must be treated under the plan11. The entities’ creditor claims can be identified as "impaired," i.e., those whose contractual rights are to be enhanced or who will be paid less than the full value of their claims under the plan, put the proposed rehabilitation plan to a ballot box voting12. After the disclosure statement is approved by the United States court and the ballots are collected and tallied, the court will put into motion a confirmation hearing to determine whether to confirm the plan13. In terms of Debtor in Possession. Chapter 11 bankruptcy law dictates a corporation or entity lives as distinct and apart from its investment owners, the stockholders. The chapter 11 bankruptcy case of a corporation debtor does not place one’s personal assets such as cash, receivables, building, equipment, and inventories, not contributed to the coffers of the bankrupt corporation, of the stockholders at risk. On the other hand, the stockholders will be held liable only for the investment in the company's stocks. On the other hand, a sole proprietorship, whether the business owner is the sole debtor will answer for the bankruptcy liabilities with his or her own personal assets. Similar to the corporation, a partnership lives as a distinct organization from its partners In a partnership bankruptcy case, however, the partners' personal assets can be grabbed to pay for the liabilities incurred in the bankruptcy case or the partners, forcing the partners to file for bankruptcy protection. Specifically, section 1107 of the Bankruptcy Code puts the debtor in possession in the level of a fiduciary, with the rights and powers of a chapter 11 trustee, and it needs the debtor to implement all but the investigative functions and duties of a trustee. These duties, written in the Bankruptcy Code and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, incorporates the accounting for property, examining and opposition to claims, and the filing of relevant informational information as required by the court and the U.S. trustee or bankruptcy administrator, including as monthly operating reports14. The debtor in possession can use the benefits of the other powers and duties of a trustee, especially the right, with the approval of the United States court, to hire attorneys, accountants, appraisers, auctioneers, or other professional persons to aid the debtor during the processing of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy case. The other Chapter 11 responsibilities include the filing of tax returns and reports which are either necessary or instructed by the court after confirmation, including the preparation of accounting reports. The U.S. trustee is responsible for monitoring the compliance of the debtors in possession with the reporting requirements. Further, Chapter 11 Bankruptcy law states that the courts will appoint a United States trustee or bankruptcy administrator to oversee the rehabilitation and reorganisation process. The United States trustee plays an important part in monitoring the status of a chapter 11 case and supervising its administration. The United States trustee must fulfill one’s responsibility to monitor the debtor in possession's daily business activities and the submission of relevant operations reports as well as the payment of the required fees. Additionally, the United States trustee observes the processing of the compensation and reimbursement by professionals, plans and disclosure statements submitted to the bankruptcy court, and the creditors' committees. The same trustee puts into motion the meetings of the creditors, often identified as the "section 341 meeting," in a chapter 11 case15. In fact, the United States trustee and creditors can query the debtor under oath at the section 341 meeting concerning the debtor's acts, conduct, property, and the administration of the case. Furthermore, the courts shall establish a creditors’ committee. The creditors' committees have a very important part during the Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. The creditors’ committee is selected by the United States trustee and normally includes unsecured creditors keeping the seven largest unsecured claims against the debtor16. In terms of committee reports, the committee: consults with the debtor in possession on administration of the case; investigates the debtor's conduct and operation of the business; and participates in formulating a plan17. A creditors' committee can, with the usual United States court's confirmation, hire an attorney as well as other professionals to help in the implementation of the committee's bankruptcy responsibilities. A creditors' committee can be a major safety net to the debtor in possessions’ proper control of the entities (www.uscourts.gov). PART II: INTERPRETION BY EXPERTS ON CHAPTER 11 BANKRUPTCY LAW & Reorganisation Albin Renuer18 states the bankruptcy law centers on reorganisation as one of the alternatives to help the bankrupt company. The law centers on the importance of process where the debtor can act as debtor in possession as well as perform as trustee of the entity. Further, the debtor is permitted to implement any mechanism to restructure its business. David Buchbinder19 insists the courts can allow the debtor in possession to accept a new or revised contract or dissolve any current contracts. In addition, the debtor is placed is legally moved outside the outstretched arms of other loan-related case filers with the implementation of automatic stay saving scheme.” The above quote shows that the rehabilitation plan temporarily stops the creditors from collecting their claims against the debtor. The eagerly waiting creditors can pursue their collection acts in the bankruptcy courts or the courts allow the collection acts in the original collection environments. In addition, when the entities’ total debts exceed the total assets, the business owners cannot recover a single pence or asset from the business. With the newly organized entity, the creditors are the new owners of the bankrupt business entity. However, Richard Broude, on page 4-70, states Section 362(d) (2) that the creditors have the right to oppose a stay if the debtor cannot show any convincing proof that a reorgnisation under Chapter 11 bankruptcy law will bring the ailing company back to financial health20. Specifically Bankruptcy21 is pegged on the reorganisation process. The bankruptcy law incorporates the processes focused on liquidating the business entity22. Consequently, the debtors may rise above the bankruptcy waters in one week, one month, one year, ten years, or even more, depending on the chapter 11 bankruptcy factors. The Debtor proposes a reorganisation plan to rehabilitate a net loss or other financially unprofitable company. The debtors propose the plan to creditors. The creditors can vote to implement the best alternative offered by the debtors. Next, Kevin Delaney23 reiterated the court judge approves the reorganisation plan. After the court’s yes, the creditors can confirm the reorganisation plan in order to collect the debts from the ailing company or debtor. In case a small percentage of the total creditor population object to the reorganisation plan, the plan can push through provided the cramdown criteria is met. The confirmation will succeed in an environment where some creditors oppose the reorganisation plan if the proposed reorganisation plan does not discriminate against the reluctant creditors and the reorganisation plan is fair to all creditors of the chapter 11 reorganized companies. After the approved months of reorganisation, the creditors can propose a different reorganisation plan that may or may not better than the current reorganisation. After the confirmation is implemented, the reorganisation plan binds all parties to comply with the tenets of the reorganisation process. The reorganisation plan includes the process of paying the business entities’ loan and other credit balances. All parties must comply with all reorganisation plan steps. If the majority of the creditors do not agree to the reorganisation plan, the entity must implement the entity should proceed to a Chapter 7 bankruptcy process. The process focuses on the dissolution of the entity. Under the dissolution, all the bankrupt company’s assets are sold. The amounts collected by the debtors are distributed to pay the prevailing loan and other credit amounts. Further, Nathalie Martin24opines the bankrupt companies can ask for an automatic stay of all loans and other credit balance by asking the courts to help the debtor in possession work out a plan to work with the creditors to generate profits. During the process, irrespective of the stage, the evaluation of effectiveness needs vividness with respect to the purposes of the Chapter 11 bankruptcy regulation. One of the major reasons for the need of the Chapter 11 requisites is clarifying the issues of resolving insolvency regulation. Normally, the insolvency situation is complex, multi-level and sophisticated where the significant factors of the purposes may run against the other purposes of insolvency resolution. Several bankruptcy experts emphasize the importance of injecting DIVERSITY to hasten the bankruptcy recovery process. Consequently, the complexity of the bankruptcy law provisions offers a relative advantage in the area of effectiveness25. All Both the creditor and debtors in possession must give their best for the success of the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy law to flourish26. Further, James H. Zukin, Alan Fragen and Dorian Lowell27 discuss the three major topics focusing on the global market for corporate restructuring. One of the authors’ activities includes implementing the best practices, and innovatively evolving to a more effective bankruptcy rehabilitation program. One of the best practices includes replacing the company’s unpopular products and services with a more competitive or niche-based product or service. To achieve this goal, surveys and researches are needed to find a need. Consequently, the business entity can fill the need with products. To ensure success, the new products and services must incorporate quality and price reasonableness. However some pessimistic parties believe the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy law is doomed to failure, with odds stacked against generating profits28. Similar to the capitalism theory, which had offers better economic advantages compared to the economic concepts of communism as the more effective and efficient system for increasing wealth, the step by step procedures for rehabilitating distressed entities must outshine the present debtor in possession’s current rehabilitation systems that place priorities on receiverships and liquidations at the unfavorable expense of the lower recoveries as well as the disenfranchisement of some of the affected creditors. The prevailing atmosphere of bankruptcy systems zeroing on the implementation of the receiverships and liquidations indicates the historical focus s on tangible property rights, the rights of the secured creditors, as well as the realization of assets to discharge debts. But in modern economies, we talk of cash flows and enterprise values, values that typically exceed tangible asset values29. Further, Michael Pomerleano30 states “Policy Approaches to Corporate A number of countries experienced a financial crisis in the past decade. In several of these, the corporate sector was an important factor contributing to the crisis. In turn, in many cases corporate restructuring was recognized as key to the recovery. More generally, corporate sector restructuring and reform have recently been considered essential to economic recovery, the long-term viability of corporations, and a lower risk of (subsequent) financial crises.” The author clearly shows the prevailing policy approaches in addition to the legal and regulatory changes implemented in reply to the widespread corporate failure initially implemented in eight nations during the past ten years. The affected nations include Brazil, the Czech Republic, Indonesia, Republic of Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, Thailand, and Turkey. Further, Bruce Carruthers31 insists “The Structure of Influence in Bankruptcy Law-making Political influence in law-making arrays along two dimensions. Lawmaking has a temporal structure: it unfolds along a time line. At first blush, this observation appears obvious to the point of triteness. Closer examination, however, reveals that how events unfold through time produces opportunities and introduces constraints that variously benefit those actors with the power to set and unset agendas.” Time is an asset that can be worked on by extending a reform cycle or increasing the bankruptcy recovery process speed, by enlarging or decreasing some scheduled agendas, increasing or decreasing steps, or incorporating or removing participants at different moments. An increase in the business entity’s assets indicates the company generated profits from the sale of products or services, within the same accounting period. And, Bruce Caruthers insists law-making includes some political ingredients: it revises the political players in steps that increase or decrease the range and profiles of several influential interests brought to center on the topics discussed in the issues in the political arena. The political structure emerges from negotiations among actors who try to locate entry to the decision-making activities, between the entities’ preferred. The actors had to endure the dangers of it contradicting or affirming interests among the government employees, government agencies, legislators, and private organizations, as well as between experts and other generalists. The authors center on the interplay of temporal and political architecture in the reform of bankruptcy law. In addition, Hiroshi Osana32 (2001; 13) states it shows that the liquidity asset holding has two impacts on investments. First, the liquidity asset can absorb a liquidity shock and helps to continue a profitable project. Second, it helps to continue an undesirable project and decreases the incentive of firms. This negative aspect is similar to the soft budget constraint.” In relation to the two impacts, the entities are required to implement the optimal level of liquidity during the stage of liquidity shock. If the monetary value of the liquidity asset constant vary, however, it will become difficult to control the liquidity level. Further, the fluctuation of the entity’s asset prices may decline in terms of the aggregate investments even if the agents are classified as risk neutral. The author shows that during instances where the asset prices are predicted climb perfectly, aggregate investments are assumed to decrease as long as the growth rate of the prices is too high. The paper places importance on ensuring the liquidity is positive or favorable in all business dealings. In terms of recapitalization, Hiroshi Osano mentions “It is widely believed that one of the main sources of the prolonged economic slump of the Japanese economy in the 1990 is the collapse of asset and real estate prices, which have led to a banking crisis of an unprecedented scale.” Similarly, the unsuccessful attempt to immediately resolve the banking crisis precipitated to the prolonged and massive Japanese recession. The gloomy bankruptcy picture shows that with a huge percentage of non-performing loans, lessened capital investment and substantially lower liquidity, the Japanese banking sector had significantly reduced new lending activity and triggered a large credit debacle. Furthermore, Joseph McCahery33 opines the theoretical approaches of came to the fore in a period when the upheavals in financial markets and the boom in mergers and acquisitions focused attention on the relationship between the constraints and disciplines of financial markets and the strategies of firms. The author offers there are very different reasons for consideration of important issues such as the regulation of Mergers and acquisitions, the explanation of the creditors' rights as well as the directors' duties, duties of presenting all relevant financial information to interested parts and preventing insider trading, corporate governance and the role of banks and institutional shareholders to resolve the bankruptcy issues. In the same light, Lenos Trigeorgis34 offers “almost all firms recognize that they face major uncertainties about the future, yet most firms' strategic investment decisions are primarily based on a single projection of future events” The author assumes an entity is contemplating a strategic bankruptcy decision, such as building a large new plant or setting out on a large research project. The major projects require significant commitments of both financial inputs and heightened managerial focus. Further, Andrew Haldane35 is resolute in stating “International financial crises - past, present and future International financial crises continue to crop up in many accounting periods and diverse communities for as long as international financial markets have started. Historically, Markham Lester36 states “Insolvency outside Bankruptcy: Imprisonment for Debt in the Nineteenth Century. In 1571, Parliament limited bankruptcy to 'traders', even though the term became difficult for courts to define consistently over the years. The logic behind distinguishing 'traders' from 'non-traders' held that traders often suffered from financial distress through no fault of their own, most commonly the loss of a ship at sea that might ruin a number of unfortunate and innocent merchants. Other individuals' losses, so the argument went, were due solely to their own extravagance or erroneous judgment.” To resolve the issue, academicians have allocated lots of papers and time to improve the statistical outcome of the Chapter 11 Bankuptcy law37. The above quote clearly shows that Blackstone discussed in his Commentaries that traders were normally vigilant, the only individuals who are liable to accidental business losses, and to an inability of paying their maturing loans and other debts, without any fault of their own'. By contrast, 'the law holds it to be an unjustifiable practice for any person but a trader to encumber himself with debts of any considerable value'. With this somewhat arbitrary distinction, the historical debt-collection process of imprisonment, a system that dated to the 13th century, continued parallel to the bankruptcy system to manage delinquent debtors who either fell outside the court's definition of a 'trader' or basically did not seek the helpful protection of the bankruptcy statutes. Most of the insolvent debtors who could do so, however, looked for the comforting protection of bankruptcy because of its two distinguishing features: a bankrupt could, under certain situations, be removed from one’s indebtedness and a bankrupt individual can not be dragged into a cold and lonely jail cell. In the same manner, Peter Fusaro38 “observes the bankrupt Enron that Jeffrey Skilling took control in 2001 was not the projected entity forecasted as a consultant to the firm. Enron became the poster child for the wr’new economy with an online trading operation that looked like it would redefine how markets worked, but Skilling also gathered a portfolio of assets that was classified as Enron bud an increasing burden on the financially unprofitable Enron.” In addition, while Skilling was the popular top officer implementing the rank-and-yank organizational employee setup system that set strong, even unrealistic, performance goals for Enron's workers, Furthermore, Philip Blumberg39 opined “Legal Rights, Legal Responsibilities, and Recognition of the Legal Unit: Organizations When the focus moves from individuals and physical objects to organizations, the law is confronted by a more complex problem. The courts should scrutinize the legal distinction between the organization and its members.” For the corporation is managed by individuals. When the corporation is sued for bankruptcy related nonpayment of loan amounts, it is the officers of the corporation and not the corporations’ stockholders. In addition, Elizabeth Warren and Jay Lawrence Westbrook40 emphasized that “economy and society and then echoed throughout the world, Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code deserves a prominent place. Based on the idea that a failing business can be reshaped into a successful operation, Chapter 11 was perhaps a predictable creation from a people whose majority religion embraces the idea of life from death and whose central myth is the pioneer making a fresh start on the boundless prairie. So powerful is the idea of reorganisation that Chapter 11 has heavily influenced commercial law reform throughout the world (611).” The quote clearly shows that all businesses have the right to a second or even third life. Chapter 11 Bankruptcy is giving the bankrupt business another lease on life. However, the second lease is grounded on the debtor to comply with bankruptcy Chapter 11 requirements, which are court-controlled. In the unpredictable prairie world, a bankrupt business has the probability to rise up in a state of profit. The bottom line of any business endeavor is receiving a passing grade. The passing grade is a net profit picture. A net profit picture is the result when the total net revenues exceed the total amount of variable operating expenses and total fixed expenses. The main goal of Chapter 11 bankruptcy law is for the “more capable” persons to observe, guide, and prod the debtor take a better alternative business path that will generate a better financial picture of the company. PART III Analysis Further, the above author emphasized a discussion of plan-confirmation rates must begin with some careful distinctions, similarly as the other references discussed. The idea of success in an ongoing, viable business can be elusive. On the one hand, a confirmed plan does not guarantee a successful future for the business. The evidence that a number of companies return to Chapter 11 after confirming a reorganisation plan suggests that not all businesses will enjoy smooth sailing post-bankruptcy. Just like in ANY business endeavor, the future is unpredictable. Despite everyone’s best efforts, there is always the probability that the implementation of a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy reorganisation may not bring the bankrupt company to the financially healthy level characterized with a net profit financial report. With the expert guidance of business experts and the courts, the bankrupt company can generate a financial picture of net profits. When this occurs, then the crafter of the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy and reorganisation law are person with a good and well meaning heart for they foresaw that some companies will successfully shed off the bankruptcy image using austerity and other relevant profit-generating procedures. And the quote “In the world of failing businesses…Chapter 11 reorganisation is held up as the alternative to liquidation, a solution that can put more dollars in the pockets of the creditors, save more jobs, and preserve local tax bases. At least as to the first objective, Professors Bris, Welch, and Zho say the data back up the claim. In their study of confirmed plans, they conclude that “the average Chapter 11 case retains value seventy-eight percent better than the average Chapter 7 case (616).” indicates that the framers of the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy were focused on ensuring the creditors will be able to collect all the amounts rightly theirs. The framers knew that without the Chapter 11 bankruptcy and reorganisation help, many creditors will have to wait longer than normal to collect money from a bankrupt company since the total liabilities far exceed the company’s total assets. With the new life, the company has a probability of bouncing back to a healthy financial status characterized as having a net profit financial picture. With the net profit result, the creditors can persuade the cash rich clients to pay the partial or full amount of the loans and other liabilities. Plus the quote stating “in the first report on the new law, the success rates had fallen by nearly half to one in six. This finding was a body blow that greatly strengthened the view that the post-1978 Bankruptcy Code’s Chapter 11 process was beset by problems. As a consequence, some people adopted the conventional wisdom that plan-confirmation rates under the modern regime have been very low.” can be taken positively. The data shows that at least one company out of six companies successfully hurdled the test of scampering back from their bankrupt state to a profitable business enterprise. The quote clearly shows that saving one company out of six companies give a persuasive picture that the Chapter 11 bankruptcy should be availed of by ALL ailing business enterprises. The failure of the remaining five failed Chapter 11 rehabilitated companies does not translate to the scrapping of the Chapter 11 Bankruptcy law41. Vividly, all the topics discussed in both part 1 and part 2 offer one basic concept. The Chapter 11 bankruptcy and reorganisation law is aimed to extend the life of a failed enterprise. The courts enter the picture as a referee between the creditors, a direct party in interest to the Chapter 11 proceedings. In addition, the debtors are given the right to push through with running the business under the watchful eyes of the Courts and the creditors. The Part 1 and Part 2 discussions clearly show that the law was crafted with the vision of saving one or more failed business ventures in order to make everyone happy, especially the creditors and investors. CONCLUSION BASED on the above discussion, Chapter 11 Bankruptcy law and reorganisation law gives an ailing company another lease on life under rigid requisites. The debtors must comply with the court’s orders to coordinate with the creditors and credit committee to help the bankrupt company. The creditors must enthusiastically help the debtors get back to their former healthy financial status. The Chapter 11 Bankruptcy and reorganisation law helps many beleaguered companies bounce back to their former financially profitable glory days. REFERENCES: Books: Barry Adler, Bankruptcy and Risk Allocation, 77 CORNELL L. REv. 439, 463-64 (1992) Blumberg, P. (1993). The Multinational Challenge to Corporation Law. New York: University Press p 216. Buchbinder, D. (2008). Basic Bankruptcy Law for Paralegals. New York: Aspen Press p 398. Baird, Douglas G. & Robert K. Rasmussen, The End of Bankruptcy, 55 STAN. L. REV. 751, 752 (2002) Burke Michael E. et al., International Legal Developments in Review: 2006 Regional & Comparative Law: China, 41 INT'L LAW. 777, 784-87 (2007) Carruthers, B. (1998). The Making of Corporate Bankruptcy. New York: University Press p63. Delaney, K. (1999). Strategic Bankruptcy: How Corporations adn Creditors use Chapter 11 to Their Advantage. New York: University of California Press p 8. Elias, S. (2011). The Bankruptcy: Will it Work for You? New York: Nolo Press p 207. Fusaro, P. (2002). What Went Wrong at Enron. Hoboken: J. Wiley & Sons Press p 107. Gordon Bermant & Ed Flynn, Bankruptcy by the Numbers, Outcomes of Chapter 11 Cases: U.S. Trustee Database Sheds New Light on Old Questions, AM. BANKR. INST. J., Feb. 1998, p 8. Haldane, A. (2004). Fixing Financial Crises in the 21st Century. New York: Routledge Press p 3. Lester, M. (1995). Victorian Insolvency, Imprisonment for Debt and Company Winding Up. New York: University Press p 25. Martin, N. (2008). Inside Bankruptcy Law: What Matters and Why. London: Aspen Press p 166. McCahery, J. (1994). Corporate Control and Accountability. New York: Clarendon Press p 1. Osano, H. (2001). Banking, Capital Markets and Corporate Governance. New York: Palgrave Press p 13. Pomerleano, M. (2005). Corporate Restructuring: Lessons from Experience. Washington: World Bank Press p 127. Renauer, A. (2011). How to File for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. New York: Nolo Press. Trigleorgis, L. (1995). Real Options in Capital Investment. Westport: Praeger Press p 31. Journals: Broude, R. (1985). Reorgnisations Under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Law Journal p 4 -70. Djankov, D., McLiesh, S., Shleifer. A., (2008). Debt Enforcement Around the World. Journal of Political Economy , 116 (6), 6. Warren, E., Westbork, J. (2009). The Success of Chapter 11: A Challenge to the Critics. Michigan Law Review , 107 (603), 1-40. Warren, Elizabeth & Jay Lawrence Westbrook, The Law of Debtors and Creditors 877-89 2006 Website: Chapter 11 Bankruptcy and Reorganisation Law. Retrieved April 11, 2012 from http://www.uscourts.gov/FederalCourts/Bankruptcy/BankruptcyBasics/Chapter11.aspx Read More