48 U.S.C. § 2175

Role and capacity of Oversight Board

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 48 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Actions of Oversight BoardFor the purposes of this subchapter, the Oversight Board may take any action necessary on behalf of the debtor to prosecute the case of the debtor, including—(1) filing a petition under section 2164 of this title;(2) submitting or modifying a plan of adjustment under sections 2172 and 2173 of this title; or(3) otherwise generally submitting filings in relation to the case with the court.(b) Representative of debtor

The Oversight Board in a case under this subchapter is the representative of the debtor.

(Pub. L. 114–187, title III, § 315, June 30, 2016, 130 Stat. 584.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 2018–2023 · leading case: Migrant Health Ctr., Inc. v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 919 F.3d 565 (1st Cir. 2019).
Migrant Health Ctr., Inc. v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 919 F.3d 565 (1st Cir. 2019). “48 U.S.C. § 2175 (b). We recently held that the process for appointing the Oversight Board members was unconstitutional under the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution, U.”
Altair Global Credit Opportunities Fund (A), LLC v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2018). “See 48 U.S.C. § 2175 . After the enactment of PROMESA, one of the Oversight Board’s “first actions was to instruct the Governor to provide a fiscal plan for the Commonwealth by October 14, 2016.”
Rivera-Rivera v. PREPA (1st Cir. 2021). “See 48 U.S.C. § 2175 (b) ("The [FOMB] in a case under [Title III] is the representative of the debtor.”
FOMB v. Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito (1st Cir. 2022). “See 48 U.S.C. § 2175 ; see also id. §§ 2172–73.”
FOMB v. Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito (1st Cir. 2022). “§ 2194 (n)(3)); see also 48 U.S.C. § 2175 . On May 3, 2017, the Board commenced Title III proceedings on behalf of the Commonwealth and some of its instrumentalities.”
Dinh v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2023). “See 48 U.S.C. § 2175 . Title III also has its own provisions with respect to jurisdiction and venue.”
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.