No. 23A87
William K. Harrington, United States Trustee, Region 2 v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Tags: bankruptcy-code chapter-11-reorganization equitable-mootness nonconsensual-third-party-release nondebtors opioid-litigation
Key Terms:
DueProcess Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
DueProcess Privacy JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a bankruptcy court to approve a nonconsensual third-party release of claims against nondebtors who have not filed for bankruptcy protection as part of a chapter 11 reorganization plan
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
No question identified. :
Docket Entries
2023-08-10
Application (23A87) referred to the Court.
2023-08-10
Application (23A87) granted by the Court. The application for stay presented to Justice Sotomayor and by her referred to the Court is granted. The mandate of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in case No. 22-110 and the consolidated cases is recalled and stayed. Applicant suggested this Court treat the application as a petition for a writ of certiorari; doing so, the petition is granted. The parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether the Bankruptcy Code authorizes a court to approve, as part of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, a release that extinguishes claims held by nondebtors against nondebtor third parties, without the claimants’ consent. The Clerk is directed to establish a briefing schedule that will allow the case to be argued in the December 2023 argument session. The stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court.
2023-08-09
Motion to Direct the Clerk to File a Sur-Reply filed by respondent Debtors, Purdue Pharma L.P., and Its Affiliates.
2023-08-09
Motion to Direct the Clerk to File a Sur-Reply denied by Justice Sotomayor.
2023-08-07
Reply of applicant William K. Harrington filed.
2023-08-04
Response to application from respondent State of California, et al. filed.
2023-08-04
Response to application from respondent Ad Hoc Group of Individual Victims of Purdue Pharma, L.P., et al. filed.
2023-08-04
Response to application from respondent The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Purdue Pharma L.P., et al. filed.
2023-08-04
Response to application from respondent Debtors, Purdue Pharma L.P., and Its Affiliates filed.
2023-08-04
Response to application from respondent Multi-State Governmental Entities Group filed.
2023-08-04
Response to application from respondent City of Grande Prairie, et al. filed.
2023-08-04
Response to application from respondent The Ad Hoc Committee of Governmental and Other Contingent Litigation Claimants filed.
2023-07-28
Application (23A87) for a stay, submitted to Justice Sotomayor.
2023-07-28
Response to application (23A87) requested by Justice Sotomayor, due by noon (EDT), Friday, August 4, 2023.
Attorneys
Ad Hoc Group of Individual Victims of Purdue Pharma, L.P., et al.
John Christopher Shore — White & Case LLP, Respondent
John Christopher Shore — White & Case LLP, Respondent
City of Grande Prairie, as representative plaintiff for a class consisting of all Canadian municipalities, the Cities of Brantford, Grand Prairie, Lethbridge, and Wetaskiwin, the Peter Ballantyne Cree Nation, on behalf of all Canadian First Nations and Me
Joseph Carl Cecere — Cecere, PC, Respondent
Joseph Carl Cecere — Cecere, PC, Respondent
Debtors, Purdue Pharma L.P., and Its Affiliates
Gregory George Garre — Latham & Watkins LLP, Respondent
Gregory George Garre — Latham & Watkins LLP, Respondent
Multi-State Governmental Entities Group
Kevin C. Maclay — Caplin and Drysdale, Chartered, Respondent
Kevin C. Maclay — Caplin and Drysdale, Chartered, Respondent
Jeffrey Allen Liesemer — Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, Respondent
Jeffrey Allen Liesemer — Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, Respondent
State of California
Joshua Patashnik — California Department of Justice, Respondent
Joshua Patashnik — California Department of Justice, Respondent
State of Maryland
Brian Thomas Edmunds — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
Brian Thomas Edmunds — Office of the Attorney General, Respondent
The Ad Hoc Committee of Governmental and Other Contingent Litigation Claimants
Roy T. Englert Jr. — Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Respondent
Roy T. Englert Jr. — Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, Respondent
The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Purdue Pharma L.P., et al.
Ze-wen Julius Chen — Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, Respondent
Ze-wen Julius Chen — Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, Respondent
William K. Harrington
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Petitioner
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Petitioner