Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc. (22-1079)

argument 22-1079

Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc.

Supreme Court of the United States 1h 12m 7 speakers 8 chapters transcribed 9 days ago official recording ↗

▲ 0

Transcript

jump: chapters · speakers · find in transcript

Transcript

Transcript generated automatically by AI and may contain errors.

What is the argument about Truck Insurance Exchange’s standing as a party in interest?

John G. Roberts 0:00

Argument next in case twenty two ten seventy nine, Truck Insurance Exchange versus Kaiser Gypsum Company. Ms. Ho.

Unknown 0:08

Thank you, Mr Chief Justice, and may it please the court. If anyone is a party in interest entitled to be heard in this Chapter eleven case, it's the insurer, Truck, who will pay virtually every dollar the debtors owe the asbestos claimants. Yet the Fourth Circuit's rule denies that insurer a voice. That rule, which my friends barely defend, violates the text, context and history of eleven oh nine B. It also defies the practical reality That chapter eleven cases are, as this Court has recognised, collaborative, working best when all stakeholders come together at the outset to hash things out. Congress recognized that reality and spoke expansively in eleven oh nine B to extend the right to be heard to any issue.

Unknown 0:59

Congress also gave courts a duty to ensure compliance with the code and invited broad participation to help discharge that duty. Eleven oh nine B's breadth is a feature, not a bug. It's now common ground that a party in interest is one who could be directly and adversely affected by the case. That's truck in at least two ways. First, it's the insurer paying the vast bulk of claims against the debtors. In the government's terms, it's a contracting party. From the start, then, truck's rights could have been directly and adversely affected by this case. The proof of that pudding is in the plan finding, which resolved key a key coverage dispute against trucks. Second, trucks a creditor for millions in insurance deductibles.

Unknown 1:52

For both reasons, eleven oh nine B's plain terms entitled truck to be heard on any issue. In silencing truck, the Fourth Circuit violated those terms by limiting who a party in interest is and what issues they can raise. I welcome the court's questions.

Clarence Thomas 2:08

Uh Ms. Ho, at what point do you uh determine uh the status of party and interests?

Unknown 2:15

Thank you, Justice Thomas. At the at the outset, um Section eleven oh nine B's text refers to uh be heard under any issue in this case. So we think that has to be an ex ante inquiry, in part because there are other provisions of the code apart from eleven oh nine B that affect parties and interests that don't depend on a specific plan or any plan.

Clarence Thomas 2:40

Well, the in this case uh the d the uh determination at the end uh uh or uh in was that truck was not negatively affected. How could you determine that at the out at the uh beginning of the proceedings.

Unknown 2:59

Yes, Your Honor, because I think the question should be could um could could the entity be affected um by the Chapter 11 case. And as the insurer, there are in a number of ways that truck could have been affected. It could have been affected by a plan that that resulted in the one as we were seeking with fraud prevention measures, or it could have resulted, as had happened, in a plan that didn't include those. We we came into this Chapter 11 proceeding as a creditor. The proceeding could have resulted in our claims being impaired or unimpaired. And you don't know that until the end, but that doesn't the the language of eleven oh nine B speaks to a creditor. So if you're a party an interest in the beginning

Unknown 3:44

um with a right to be heard under eleven oh nine b then you're a party in interest all the way through.

John G. Roberts 3:50

What if I I I know there's a w could have some back and forth about the facts, but in a hypothetical let's assume that Um your client uh Whichever plan you know, there's three different plans on the table and under every one your client gets you know, th th his exposure is exactly the same. It makes no difference to him. which particular uh creditors are going to get what? He's just Given the factual situation, he's uh going to walk away with exactly what he has or what he doesn't have when it's all done. W in what sense is does he have an interest in how his assets are distributed or or what the liabilities are. In other words, Although he is um uh You could identify where he is going to uh you know be on the hook or not on the hook, but at the end of the day everybody agrees it's not going to make any difference.