The final work on excusable neglect?
Article Abstract:
The US Supreme Court, in Pioneer Investment Services v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. Partnership, held that creditors asserting excusable neglect as the reason for not timely filing their claims against Chapter 11 debtors must show that allowance of the claim would not be prejudicial to the debtor, disruptive to the court or representative of willful failure to ignore deadlines. The Court did, however, fail to excuse a client's ultimate responsibility for an attorney's failure to meet a claim filing deadline. The Pioneer Court retreated from a stricter reasonable control standard.
Publication Name: Commercial Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-3055
Year: 1993
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Implied warranties arising from course of dealing or usage of trade under UCC Section 2-314(3): why all the neglect?
Article Abstract:
UCC 2-314(3) covers implied warranties which may arise out of the course of dealing or usage of trade (CDOUT), but is used infrequently for several possible reasons. Some of these reasons include confusion with the fitness or merchantability provisions, there is no CDOUT which applies, the seller has disclaimed all warranties or the breach of some other warranty. Recovery under CDOUT is a valuable approach in cases where expectations of quality exceed the standards or merchantability by an accepted or trade based practice.
Publication Name: Commercial Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-3055
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
A dinosaur, a citadel and a dogma: implied warranties of goods in mixed transactions
Article Abstract:
The predominant purpose test for implied warranties on goods of mixed transactions should be replaced by the gravamen test. The legal issue concerns whether a good in a transaction is covered by warranty when there is a failure and the transaction is covered by a warranty. The predominant purpose test is inconsistent, unpredictable and difficult, whereas the gravamen test has the advantage of not being an all-or-nothing test.
Publication Name: Commercial Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-3055
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: The fiduciary responsibilities of investment bankers in change-of-control transactions. Typography in the U.S. Reports and Supreme Court voting protocols
- Abstracts: Networking in cyberspace: electronic defamation and the potential for international forum shopping.. The unrevised Holmes and freedom of expression
- Abstracts: The electronic agency and the traditional paradigms of administrative law. Evidence before French administrative courts
- Abstracts: A more perfect union: a legal and social analysis of domestic partnership ordinances. Membership in a particular social group under the Refugee Act of 1980: social identity and the legal concept of the refugee
- Abstracts: The bankruptcy courts explore new automation to improve efficiency; better ways to manage data are considered