NO CLE - Very Good Debates

John W. Lucas, Moderator
Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP; San Francisco
Judicial Debate
Resolved: The “disinterestedness” requirement should be strictly enforced under § 327 (no waivers or ethical walls).
Pro: Hon. Randall L. Dunn
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (D. Or.); Portland
Con: Hon. Madeleine C. Wanslee
U.S. Bankruptcy Court (D. Ariz.); Phoenix
Business Debate
Resolved: Acceleration of a debt obligation under a credit agreement should act to prevent the lender from enforcing a prepayment premium
Pro: Lori Sinanyan
Jones Day; Los Angeles
Con: Michael H. Strub, Jr.
Irell & Manella LLP; Newport Beach, Calif.
Consumer Debate
Resolved: Attorneys should be permitted to unbundle services under an engagement agreement with a consumer debtor.
Pro: Samuel A. Schwartz
The Schwartz Law Firm, Inc.; Las Vegas
Con: John R. Bollinger
Boleman Law Firm, P.C.; Hampton, Va.