In the 2011 case Stern v. Marshall, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that certain kinds of lawsuits filed on behalf of a debtor in bankruptcy could not constitutionally be heard by bankruptcy judges, but only by district judges who were appointed under Article III and had the protections of life tenure and a guarantee against salary reduction.
The court did not resolve the question of whether bankruptcy judges could hear such cases if all parties consented, and when the court granted review in Executive Benefits v. Arkison, the constitutionality of consent, as well as what form consent must take, were the principal issues presented.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
