{"title":"法庭之友摘要:解除诉讼的可仲裁性(Anderson诉Credit One Bank)","authors":"R. Brubaker, Robert M. Lawless, Bruce A. Markell","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2925494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This amicus brief was filed in Anderson v. Credit One Bank, No. 16-2496 (2d. Cir.). The brief explains why a debtor's claim for violation of the bankruptcy discharge injunction is not subject to a predispute arbitration agreement. The brief makes three arguments: (1) the history of the bankruptcy discharge shows Congress intentionally chose injunctive relief to enforce the bankruptcy discharge; (2) the bankruptcy discharge and discharge injunction are not \"claims\" against which an arbitration agreement can operate; and (3) the discharge injunction is a central piece of the Bankruptcy Code that inherently conflicts with the Federal Arbitration Act.","PeriodicalId":286992,"journal":{"name":"University of Illinois College of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Amicus Brief on Arbitrability of the Discharge (Anderson v. Credit One Bank)\",\"authors\":\"R. Brubaker, Robert M. Lawless, Bruce A. Markell\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2925494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This amicus brief was filed in Anderson v. Credit One Bank, No. 16-2496 (2d. Cir.). The brief explains why a debtor's claim for violation of the bankruptcy discharge injunction is not subject to a predispute arbitration agreement. The brief makes three arguments: (1) the history of the bankruptcy discharge shows Congress intentionally chose injunctive relief to enforce the bankruptcy discharge; (2) the bankruptcy discharge and discharge injunction are not \\\"claims\\\" against which an arbitration agreement can operate; and (3) the discharge injunction is a central piece of the Bankruptcy Code that inherently conflicts with the Federal Arbitration Act.\",\"PeriodicalId\":286992,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Illinois College of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Illinois College of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2925494\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Illinois College of Law Legal Studies Research Paper Series","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2925494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Amicus Brief on Arbitrability of the Discharge (Anderson v. Credit One Bank)
This amicus brief was filed in Anderson v. Credit One Bank, No. 16-2496 (2d. Cir.). The brief explains why a debtor's claim for violation of the bankruptcy discharge injunction is not subject to a predispute arbitration agreement. The brief makes three arguments: (1) the history of the bankruptcy discharge shows Congress intentionally chose injunctive relief to enforce the bankruptcy discharge; (2) the bankruptcy discharge and discharge injunction are not "claims" against which an arbitration agreement can operate; and (3) the discharge injunction is a central piece of the Bankruptcy Code that inherently conflicts with the Federal Arbitration Act.