11 U.S.C. § 705
Creditors’ committee
Section 705(a) of the House amendment adopts a provision contained in the Senate amendment that limits a committee of creditors to not more than 11; the House bill contained no maximum limitation.
This section is derived from section 44b of the Bankruptcy Act [section 72(b) of former title 11] without substantial change. It permits election by general unsecured creditors of a committee of not fewer than 3 members and not more than 11 members to consult with the trustee in connection with the administration of the estate, to make recommendations to the trustee respecting the performance of his duties, and to submit to the court any question affecting the administration of the estate. There is no provision for compensation or reimbursement of its counsel.
1986—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 99–554 inserted “or the United States trustee” in three places.
Effective date and applicability of amendment by Pub. L. 99–554 dependent upon the judicial district involved, see section 302(d), (e) of Pub. L. 99–554, set out as a note under section 581 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1982–2022 · leading case: Dart & Bogue Co. v. Slosberg, 522 A.2d 763 (Conn. 1987).
Dart & Bogue Co. v. Slosberg, 522 A.2d 763 (Conn. 1987). “The Unsecured Creditors Committee in the plaintiff’s chapter 11 case is a party in the plaintiffs bankruptcy proceeding; see 11 U.S.C. § 705 ; and, therefore, a party to the certification question before this court.”
In Re Morrison, 69 B.R. 586 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1987). “If indeed Alexander considered the Trustee an inappropriate appointee, his remedy was to attempt to form a Creditors’ Committee and elect a Trustee, per 11 U.S.C. § 705 (a), not to attempt to undermine the efforts of the duly-appointed Trustee.”
In Re Metro Shippers, Inc., 63 B.R. 593 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1986). “11 U.S.C. § 705 . 4 . Bankruptcy Rule 2006 states as follows: Rule 2006 SOLICITATION AND VOTING OF PROXIES IN CHAPTER 7 LIQUIDATION CASES (a) Applicability.”
In re MF Global Inc., 462 B.R. 36 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2011). “While the UST acknowledges that she has no official role in the administration of a SIPA liquidation — that role instead is played by SIPC — the UST is interested in the outcome of the Steering Committee Motion “because it seeks the formation of a creditors’ committee by a means…”
In Re J. David Dominelli, Debtors. Off. Creditors' Comm. v. Louis Metzger, Tr., 788 F.2d 584 (9th Cir. 1986). “There is no provision in 11 U.S.C. § 705 (1982), the applicable statute in Chapter 7 cases, for compensation of a creditors’ committee counsel.”
Reciprocal Merchandising Servs., Inc. v. All Advert. Assocs., Inc., 163 B.R. 689 (S.D.N.Y. 1994). “Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 705 , a creditors committee was constituted (the “Creditors Committee”).”
In Re Spears, 308 B.R. 793 (W.D. Mich. 2004). “11 U.S.C. § 705 (5). Treating the amount of joint claims in connection with a Section 522(b)(2)(B) exemption as an evidentiary issue as opposed to a dispositive issue is not a novel concept.”
In Re E.D. Wilkins Grain Co., 235 B.R. 647 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. 1999). “Important constituencies, such as any committee elected pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 705 and the United States Trustee, have the right to appear and be heard on the proposed agreement regarding the automatic stay.”
Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Elmas Trading Corp., 625 F. Supp. 890 (D. Nev. 1986). “See 11 U.S.C. § 705 . Although this case is not a bankruptcy proceeding, this Court is mindful of the similarities that this receivership has to a bankruptcy proceeding.”
In re Energy Coop., Inc., 105 B.R. 921 (7th Cir. 1989). “The Settlement Agreement was endorsed by the Official Creditors Committee, which had been elected pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 705 . The settlement, however, was opposed by a number of parties who are the appellants in this case.”
Matter of Wekiva Dev. Corp., 22 B.R. 301 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1982). “The Motion seeks an appointment for the purpose of permitting the secured creditors’ committee to perform all functions granted to a committee by 11 U.S.C. § 705 (b) of the Bankruptcy Code.”
Holders of Class C Common Stock of Rimsat, Ltd. v. Kauthar Sdn. Bhd. (In re Rimsat Ltd.), 229 B.R. 910 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 1998). “11 U.S.C. § 705 . Similarly, there is really no mechanism for filing a proof of interest in Chapter 7 cases.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.