Declaring Bankruptcy |Get Solution

Case Description:  Johns-Manville Corp. is a Fortune 500 company and was deemed a paradigm of success in corporate America by the financial community. However, the company produced a product that was poison—asbestos.  Moreover, Manville knew it was poison and had known it since the 1930s, and it hid the danger (ASBESTOS: THINK AGAIN: INDUSTRY HID DANGERS FOR DECADES  (Links to an external site.) https://www.ewg.org/research/asbestos-think-again By 1982 approximately 16,000 lawsuits were pending against Manville, and it anticipated a further crushing economic burden by the filing of an even more staggering number of suits by those who had been exposed but who will not manifest the asbestos-related diseases until some time during this future period (20-30 years as the disease manifests itself–“the future asbestos claimants”). Approximately 6,000 asbestos health claims were estimated to have arisen in only the first 16 months since the filing date. The burden was compounded by the insurance industry’s general disavowal of liability to Manville on policies written for this very purpose. Procedure: JM petitioned for a preemptive bankruptcy under Chapter 11; attorneys representing some of the people poisoned by JM’s product moved to dismiss the petition. Issue:  Can JM preemptively declare bankruptcy and discharge future cases? Why? or Why Not?              Case Questions: What was the intention of Manville’s Chapter 11 declaration? Why was it important for the company to declare Chapter 11? (Analyze the purpose of the Manville’s BK declaration and the reason behind it.)  Was it ethical for Manville to initiate the BK proceedings? How does this case demonstrate the fundamental purpose of Chapter 11 as opposed to Chapter 7 BK filings?  The historical background here is that Manville knew from at least 1930 that asbestos—used in many industrial applications—was a deadly carcinogen, and for decades, it worked diligently to conceal and obfuscate the fact. What “good faith” argument was raised by the movants in this case?   Case Study Directions: Submit a 3-5 page paper analyzing the Case above. Give background information describing BK, types of bankruptcies, and the purpose of BK filings.  Provide a scholarly argument on the issue: Can JM preemptively declare bankruptcy and discharge future cases? Why? or Why Not? You also need to provide analytical and critical responses to the three (3) Case Questions listed above.    As a college-level course, please ensure that your arguments original, substantive, analytical, interactive, and critical. Make sure to use scholarly writing using APA format, and include appropriate references, proper grammar, and punctuation in all of your interactions.     ============================================================== You can use the following sample outline for your Case Study assignment:  Case Study Assignment Sample Outline: Give a summary of the Case, may be an Abstract  if you like Describe what the Issue/Problem is and the cause and effect of the Problem Provide your conclusion of the Case and your recommendations It may be useful if you breakdown your Paper based on topics like: Abstract   Introduction, Case Analysis Conclusion References   You can follow the outline to answer the Case questions within the framework above. Hope this helps, Dr. Abraham ============================================================   Please refer to the Rubric for grading criteria for the Case Study.  Rubric Case Study Rubric Case Study Rubric Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Analysis of Case Identification and understanding of the case study 20.0 pts Exemplary: Thorough and insightful analysis of the issues using the laws and precedents and addressed the issue analytically. 15.0 pts Good: Reasonably thorough analysis of the issues using the facts presented, laws and case precedents and handled the issues with less analysis. 10.0 pts Fair: Less thorough analysis of the issues presented using the facts presented, laws and case precedents and handled each of the issues 5.0 pts Poor: Marginal analysis of the issues using relevant facts, laws and case precedents; did not present through analysis of the issue. 0.0 pts Unacceptable: Missing assignment submission or utterly unacceptable analysis. 20.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Argument, Reasoning and Decision Presenting opinion and reasoning to support decision making 20.0 pts Exemplary: Effective decision making based on the issues and precedent demonstrating good understanding of the process 15.0 pts Good Good decision making based on moderate analysis and understanding of the issues and precedent on a basic level. 10.0 pts Fair: Decision was not clear, or the decision was made without adequate thoughtful analysis or legal basis. 5.0 pts Poor: Did not make decision on the issues presented based on legal analysis. 0.0 pts Unacceptable: Missing assignment or unacceptable reasoning, argument or decision. 20.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Understanding of Laws and Precedents Identification and understanding of the laws and precedents pertaining to legal issue 20.0 pts Exemplary: Identifies, demonstrates and understands the laws and legal precedents for the case study 15.0 pts Good Identifies and/or understands most of laws and legal precedents for the case study 10.0 pts Fair Identifies and/or understands minimal laws and legal precedents for the case study 5.0 pts Poor: Minimally identifies, demonstrates and/or understands the laws and legal precedents for the case study 0.0 pts Unacceptable: Missing assignment or unacceptable understanding of the case study. 20.0 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Writing, formatting and Presentation Skills Effective writing including appropriate formatting, grammar, spelling and organization 20.0 pts Exemplary: Excellent writing with minimal, if any, errors in formatting, composition, grammar or spelling, and substantive and qualitative writing. 15.0 pts Good: Minimal or occasional errors in formatting, composition, grammar and spelling, and less substantive in size. 10.0 pts Fair: Significant errors in formatting, spelling, grammar and composition. 5.0 pts Poor: Significant writing issues with high level of errors in formatting, composition, grammar and spelling. 0.0 pts No Marks Missing assignment or unacceptable level of academic writing. 20.0 pts Total Points: 80.0 Previous Next