Whether creditors and debtors, plaintiffs and defendants, and parties in interest are allowed, required, or exempt from instituting the mitigation doctrine

QUESTIONS PRESENTED There is great confusion and a significant disagreement between the Federal Courts of Appeals among themselves and within decisions rendered by the Texas, Ohio, and Delaware Supreme Courts concerning both the implication of the doctrine of mitigation in civil litigation and the transfer or lack thereof of claims upon the sale of corporate securities. “The questions presented are: 1. Are creditors and debtors, plaintiffs and defendants, and parties in interest allowed, required, or exempt from instituting the mitigation doctrine? 2. Whether all claims and causes of action travel with the sale of a corporate security or remain with the injured party upon its sale. 3. Whether at common law, only the person who suffered the injury, absent assignment of a chose in action, can seek redress for the injury; a position supported by the American Bankers Association, the Commercial Law Professors, and a recent decision by the Supreme Court of Ohio in Cheatham, infra., in contrast to the decision by the Third Court of Appeals in English v EFH. 2