以州为例:具体州解释如何澄清BAPCPA§522的模糊性并保护州豁免法

Kay E. Oskvig
{"title":"以州为例:具体州解释如何澄清BAPCPA§522的模糊性并保护州豁免法","authors":"Kay E. Oskvig","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2312235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"After Congress revised the Bankruptcy Code in 2005, courts have taken divergent views about how to apply 11 U.S.C. § 522 in relation to state exemptions. Three main interpretations have developed: antiextraterritoriality, preemption, and state-specific. This Note advocates the state-specific approach, as it prevents forum shopping without rendering state exemption laws void or futile. The state-specific view requires courts to consider both state case law and public policy. When state statutes remain silent, courts applying the state-specific interpretation should liberally construe the exemption statutes in favor of the debtor and allow extraterritorial application.","PeriodicalId":368113,"journal":{"name":"State & Local Government eJournal","volume":"80 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Look to the States: How the State-Specific Interpretation Clarifies BAPCPA's § 522 Ambiguity and Protects State Exemption Laws\",\"authors\":\"Kay E. Oskvig\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2312235\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"After Congress revised the Bankruptcy Code in 2005, courts have taken divergent views about how to apply 11 U.S.C. § 522 in relation to state exemptions. Three main interpretations have developed: antiextraterritoriality, preemption, and state-specific. This Note advocates the state-specific approach, as it prevents forum shopping without rendering state exemption laws void or futile. The state-specific view requires courts to consider both state case law and public policy. When state statutes remain silent, courts applying the state-specific interpretation should liberally construe the exemption statutes in favor of the debtor and allow extraterritorial application.\",\"PeriodicalId\":368113,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"State & Local Government eJournal\",\"volume\":\"80 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"State & Local Government eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2312235\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"State & Local Government eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2312235","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

国会于2005年修订《破产法》后,法院对如何适用《美国法典》第11编第522条有关州豁免的规定持不同意见。有三种主要的解释:反治外法权、优先购买权和针对特定国家的解释。本说明提倡针对特定州的方法,因为它可以防止论坛购物,而不会使州豁免法律无效或无效。特定州的观点要求法院同时考虑州判例法和公共政策。当州法规保持沉默时,适用州特有解释的法院应自由地解释豁免法规,使其有利于债务人,并允许域外适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Look to the States: How the State-Specific Interpretation Clarifies BAPCPA's § 522 Ambiguity and Protects State Exemption Laws
After Congress revised the Bankruptcy Code in 2005, courts have taken divergent views about how to apply 11 U.S.C. § 522 in relation to state exemptions. Three main interpretations have developed: antiextraterritoriality, preemption, and state-specific. This Note advocates the state-specific approach, as it prevents forum shopping without rendering state exemption laws void or futile. The state-specific view requires courts to consider both state case law and public policy. When state statutes remain silent, courts applying the state-specific interpretation should liberally construe the exemption statutes in favor of the debtor and allow extraterritorial application.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信