Before the Supreme Court’s seminal ruling in Stern v. Marshall,1 bankruptcy courts regularly entered final orders in fraudulent conveyance actions and other "core"2 matters. In Stern v. Marshall, the Supreme Court ruled that despite being statutorily defined as "core" under the bankruptcy code, bankruptcy courts do not have the constitutional power to adjudicate counterclaims to proofs of claim because they are based in state law. Following the same course, the Ninth Circuit recently held in In re Bellingham Insurance Agency, Inc.,3 that a non-Article III bankruptcy judge lacks constitutional authority to enter a final judgment on a fraudulent conveyance action against a nonclaimant to a bankruptcy estate.
To read more about this topic, please see full article below:
No representation is made that the quality of services to be performed is greater
than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.