Professor Daniel Keating comments on and adds to Professor Martin’s arguments by surveying some bankruptcy players to gain some “real world” perspective, including: two federal bankruptcy judges, one chapter 7 and chapter 13 standing trustee, one career law clerk to a federal bankruptcy judge, one former attorney advisor for the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, one bankruptcy lawyer who does mostly business but some consumer bankruptcy, and four lawyers who do primarily or exclusively consumer bankruptcy work. Based on this perspective, Keating concludes that whether Martin’s prescriptions for bankruptcy reform will make bankruptcy more relevant depends a lot on the accuracy of empirical assumptions and predictions that underlie her Article—assumptions about the characteristics of the current consumer debtor population as well as predictions about how her reforms would affect the future behavior of both debtors and creditors.
The Relative Relevance of Bankruptcy: A Response to Professor Martin,
Emory Bankr. Devs. J.
Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.emory.edu/ebdj/vol36/iss2/10