Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 28 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from In Re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc. Anchor | green | “it is not necessary that success be guaranteed, but only that the plan present a workable scheme of organization and operation from which there may be a reasonable expectation of success.” | 8 |
| 2 | In Re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc. | green | “a plan proponent is afforded significant flexibility in classifying claims under 1122(a) if there is a reasonable basis for the classification scheme and if all claims within a particular class are substantially similar.” | 7 |
| 3 | In Re Cellular Information Systems, Inc. | green | “the plan proponent need only demonstrate that there exists the reasonable probability that the provisions of the plan can be performed” | 4 |
| 4 | In Re Texaco Inc. | green | “in determining whether a plan complies with section 1129(a)(1), reference must be made to code 1122 and 1123 with respect to the classification of claims and the contents of a plan of reorganization” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.