Upload
kirk-hartley
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
1/17
© Copyright 2014 by K&L Gates LLP. All rights reserved.
Nicholas P. Vari
K&L Gates LLP
GARLOCK AND TRUST TRANSPARENCY:
WHAT IS THE END OBJECTIVE?
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
2/17
As year-end 2012, bankruptcy trusts held over $18 billion incash, with another $11-12 billion in bankruptcies still
pending confirmation. Scarcella, M, Kelso, P, AsbestosBankruptcy Trusts: A 2013 Overview of Trust Assets, (2013)
From 2006-2012, the trust system paid out over $15 billion
to asbestos claimants.Id
. Contribution remedies through the bankruptcy trust system
do not provide a remedy for tort system defendants.
Legislative remedies at the state level are difficult tofashion, even if they could be passed.
Equitable solutions are available in the tort system underexisting law.
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
3/17
© Copyright 2014 by K&L Gates LLP. All rights reserved.
CONTRIBUTION REMEDIES UNDER THE
BANKRUPTCY TRUST PROCEDURES
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
4/17
(i) The Indirect Claimant has paid in full the liability andobligations of the Trust to the Individual to whom the
Asbestos PI Trust would otherwise have had a liability
or obligation under the TDP (the “Direct Claimant”); (ii) The Direct Claimant and the Indirect Claimant have
forever released the Trust from all liability to the DirectClaimant; and
(iii) The claim is not otherwise barred by a statute oflimitation or repose or other applicable law.
CONDITIONS OF PAYMENT (FROM COMBUSTION
ENGINEERING 524(g) ASBESTOS PI TRUST
DISTRIBUTION PROCEDURES)
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
5/17
In no event shall any Indirect Claimant have any rightsagainst the Asbestos PI Trust superior to the rights ofthe related Direct Claimant against the Asbestos PITrust, including any rights with respect to the timing,amount, or manner of payment.
The Direct Claimant’s claim against the Asbestos PITrust must also have been liquidated by the Indirect
Claimant by settlement … or a Final Order, and hasbeen paid by the Indirect Claimant.
HOWEVER
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
6/17
Provided an Indirect Claimant supplies a release in a
substance and form acceptable to the Trustees, butcannot meet the presumptive requirements set forth
above, the Indirect Claimant may request that the Asbestos PI Trust review the Indirect Asbestos PI TrustClaim individually to determine whether the IndirectClaimant can establish under applicable state law that
the Indirect Claimant has paid all or a portion of aliability or obligation that the Asbestos PI Trust has onthe Direct Claim as of the Effective Date at the TDP.
ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURE
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
7/17
However, in no event shall any reimbursement to theIndirect Claimant be greater than the amount to whichthe Direct Claimant would have otherwise been entitled.
Any dispute between the Asbestos PI Trust and aIndirect Claimant over whether the Indirect Claimanthas a right of reimbursement for any amount paid to aDirect Claimant shall be subject to the arbitration
procedures as adopted by the Asbestos PI Trust. If such dispute is not resolved by said arbitration
procedures, the Indirect Claimant may litigate thedispute in the tort system…
ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURE (cont.)
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
8/17© Copyright 2014 by K&L Gates LLP. All rights reserved.
LEGISLATIVE REMEDIES
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
9/17
Transparency legislation has been passed incertain states, the but the transparencylegislation introduced, on its own, is insufficientto create a remedy for tort system defendants.
Wisconsin
Oklahoma
FACT Act
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
10/17
American Legislative Exchange Council(“ALEC”) has proposed legislation (“AsbestosClaim Transparency Act of 2007”), which hasnot been advanced before any state legislature.
Transparency Compelled submissions at risk of dismissal
Admissibility of trust forms
“Attributed values” for set-off purposes, with
presumption that the claim will paid, with correctivemechanism in place.
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
11/17
Uniform legislation is problematic, because it cannot bereadily adapted to the allocation nuances of a particular
jurisdiction.
The combination of federal bankruptcy law and tortsystem liability allocation mechanisms is likely toocomplex to lend itself to a legislative solution.
PROBLEMS WITH LEGISLATIVE SOLUTIONS
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
12/17© Copyright 2014 by K&L Gates LLP. All rights reserved.
TORT SYSTEM REMEDIES
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
13/17
Bankruptcy trust recoveries do not have a specificparallel in existing law.
- Not comparable to workers’ compensation remedies
- Not collateral source recoveries
Through existing law and the use of existing equitabledoctrines, courts can create mechanisms that addressfairly the bankruptcy trust recoveries in the tort system.
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
14/17
To treat bankruptcy trust recoveries as closely aspossible to recoveries from active tort defendants.
OBJECTIVE
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
15/17
While, by far, the most popular means of addressingthe issue, transparency in the bankruptcy tortsubmission process is a starting point, not an endpoint.
Transparency relief has been provided by courts innumerous jurisdictions.
I. TRANSPARENCY
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
16/17
Compelling trust recoveries can be cumbersome andobjectionable.
Permitting courts to estimate trust recoveries and
allocating set-off credits for estimated recoverieswould give defendants the benefit of the recovery,without forcing plaintiff to seek the funds.
Assignments of trust claims that plaintiffs choose notto pursue may also be a viable solution.
Pursuing a failure-to-mitigate defense can be a viableoption. Paulus v. Crane Co., 224 Cal. App. 4th 1357(2014).
II. ADDRESSING DELAYED CLAIMS SUBMISSIONS
8/21/2019 2014 Garlock Presentation by Nick Vari
17/17
Pure joint-and-several liability jurisdictions will seek tobring as much money as possible into the verdict set-off calculation.
Pure several liability and UCJTA jurisdictions will beconcerned with allocating fault to non-bankruptentities.
“Split” jurisdictions will seek both remedies in different
damage contexts.
III. TAILORING REMEDIES TO ADDRESS VARIOUS
LIABILITY ALLOCATION MECHANISMS