The hotly-debated case of Stern v. Marshall elicits groans, head banging, and repetitive eye rolling at its mere mention. Perceived as a cancerous growth eating away at the once simplistic concept of bankruptcy authority, Stern created confusion and controversy unparalleled in bankruptcy jurisprudence. Since the 2011 ruling, courts and practitioners have struggled to define the jurisdictional powers of bankruptcy judges, and the results nationwide have been less than uniform. This article provides a condensed overview of North Carolina’s treatment of several types of Stern claims and examines North Carolina’s approach to consensual bankruptcy authority.
Read the complete "Charting the Murky Waters: Treatment of Stern Claims in North Carolina," in pages 5–9 of the attached The Disclosure Statement.
Republished with permission. This article first appeared in the The Disclosure Statement, a publication of the North Carolina Bar Association, in Volume 36, No. 1, on October 2014.