Commercial Law League of
White Paper to Federal Trade Commission
The Commercial Law League of America (CLLA) submitted a position paper to Congress on December 7, 2005 in agreement with letters recently circulated by the National Bankruptcy Conference (“NBC”), the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations ("AFL-CIO") and the International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (“UAW”) [attached] opposing the pension termination surcharge provision contained in the recently passed S. 1932 Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005 and in the corresponding provisions now pending in the House in H.R. 4241, entitled Deficit Reduction Act of 2005. While the CLLA acknowledges the legislative attempt to improve the solvency of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”), the proposed surcharge will have a disastrous impact on debtor-companies attempting to undergo reorganization and thus, also on retirees, employees and creditors.
The CLLA urged Congress to consider the possible consequences of this proposal. Under H.R. 4241, a surcharge of $1,250 per defined benefit plan participant for three years will be assessed on companies that terminate their pension plans during the pendency of bankruptcy. The CLLA concluded by urging members of congress to vote no.
The position paper and letters from the NBC, AFL-CIO and UAW can be downloaded here.
BRIEF OF THE COMMERCIAL LAW LEAGUE OF AMERICA AS AMICUS CURIAE
KOONS BUICK PONTIAC GMC, INC., v. BRADLEY NIGH
Petitioner espouses the decision in Strange v. Monogram Credit Card Bank of Georgia, 129 F.3d 943 (7th Cir. 1997). The Commercial Law League of America asserts that the reasoning of that case is defective and inconsistent with the rules of legislative construction adopted by this Court. Respondent’s position gives effect to each portion of Section 1640(a)(2)(A), whereas Petitioner’s argument renders Section 1640(a)(2)(A)(iii) meaningless.
Position Paper on the Attorney Liability Provisions of H.R. 333
The League has serious concerns regarding the provisions of Section 102 of H.R. 333 that impose liability on attorneys representing consumer debtors in Chapter 7 bankruptcy cases. These provisions, which appear intended to impose liability upon counsel when his client’s income and expenses fail to pass muster under the means test, are fraught with problems ranging from interpretative difficultly to a disruption of the core relationship between attorney and client.
The CLLA is pleased to note that future versions of bankruptcy reform have generally had small business defined as $2 million.
The purpose of this comment is to address amendments to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) the League believes are necessary to eliminate statutory impediments to the legitimate collection of debt that, concurrently, provide no real benefit to consumers. The League understands the importance of the FDCPA to consumer debtors as well as its importance in ensuring a level playing field for those involved in debt collection. However, practical experience has shown that aspects of the FDCPA diminish legitimate access to legal remedies – raising significant Due Process concerns in the process – simply because the party seeking redress is attempting to collect a debt.
Critical Substantive Issues for Meaningful Bankruptcy Reform Position Paper. Submitted to United States Congress, March, 2003.
As a sponsor of the American Board of Certification, the CLLA encourages certification of attorneys in business bankruptcy, consumer bankruptcy and creditors' rights law.