Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

In re UNR Industries, Inc.

45 B.R. 322 (1984)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 35,600+ case briefs...

In re UNR Industries, Inc.

United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois

45 B.R. 322 (1984)

Facts

Asbestos manufacturer UNR Industries, Inc. (UNR) (debtor) filed for bankruptcy. The creditor’s committee of asbestos-related plaintiffs and individual asbestos claimant Joseph Newton (collectively, the committee) moved in federal district court for an order allowing 17,000 personal-injury claims against UNR to proceed to trial in district court to estimate the value of the claims. A study by Towers, Perrin, Foster & Crosby (the Towers study) was already underway in the bankruptcy proceeding to estimate the claims’ value. Under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(B), bankruptcy courts had jurisdiction over core bankruptcy proceedings, defined to include estimation of claims for purposes such as plan confirmation, but not estimation of personal-injury tort or wrongful-death claims for purposes of distribution. The committee asserted that estimating the personal-injury claims against UNR was not a core proceeding and argued that under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(5), personal-injury tort and wrongful-death claims against a debtor must be tried in district court, rather than in bankruptcy court. UNR opposed the motion, arguing, among other things, that bankruptcy judges could act as magistrate judges for noncore proceedings. The committee responded that allowing the bankruptcy court to hold the proceedings required to estimate the claims would not be any more efficient than allowing the district court to hold the same proceedings. The committee also made other arguments, including that it would be unfair to allow the bankruptcy court to estimate the claims because the court might have incentive to undervalue the claims just so a plan could be developed. The court considered the parties’ arguments in ruling on the committee’s motion.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Hart, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 618,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 35,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 618,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 35,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership