Practice and Procedure

Proper representation requires that the lawyer consider from the onset of the relationship a variety of practical and ethical concerns. This panel discussion will focus on such issues as whether bankruptcy is the best alternative and which form of bankruptcy is the appropriate one, as well as certain pre-bankruptcy considerations and ensuring that the representation does not run awry of certain ethical considerations and canons.

Do you know the correct procedural answer, and even if the answer is “yes,” can you explain to your client why the practical answer might still be “no”? Corporate bankruptcy attorneys need to understand the procedural and practical effects of a bankruptcy judge’s discretion in key and routine motion practice.

The U.S. Supreme Court will decide three bankruptcy cases this term: (1) Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison, which addresses the constitutionality of the district court referral system for bankruptcy cases and consent to jurisdiction where separation of powers is at issue; (2) Clark v. Rameker, which involves the availability of exemptions for inherited IRAs; and (3) Law v. Siegel, which deals with a bankruptcy court’s authority under § 105 to surcharge exemptions.

This panel will take an objective look at the viability and the purposes of the proposed national plan form and the amendments to the bankruptcy rules related thereto.

State courts are increasingly relaxing their rules to allow attorneys to provide a-la-carte services to parties in cases appearing before them. However, bankruptcy courts have been reluctant to do so. Is it because the Bankruptcy Code is so complicated? Or is it because what is good for parties in state court is not good for those in bankruptcy court? This panel of experts will examine whether counsel can provide limited representation services to parties in bankruptcy matters and maintain their ethical obligations to the client.