By Brian T. Cumings, Graves, Dougherty, Heron and Moody (Austin, TX)
In June of 2011, the Supreme Court created a minor uproar in the bankruptcy community when it handed down its opinion in Stern v. Marshall.1 In a wide-ranging majority opinion delivered by Chief Justice Roberts, only two things were clear: a lot of money was at stake in the case and Congress had overreached in some way in its statutory grants of authority to bankruptcy courts.
The core holding of Stern was that Article III of the Constitution precluded an . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or sign in below:
