391 F.3d 190 (3rd Cir. 2004), 03-3392, In re Combustion Engineering Inc.

Docket Nº:03-3392, 03-3415, 03-3425, 03-3436, 03-3445, 03-3446, 03-3450, 03-3558.
Citation:391 F.3d 190
Party Name:In re: COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC. First State Insurance Company; Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, Appellants Certain Cancer Claimants, being those individuals identified on a Rule 2019 Disclosure filed in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware and creditors of Combustion Engineering, Inc., Appellants Certain Underwriters at Llo
Case Date:December 02, 2004
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 190

391 F.3d 190 (3rd Cir. 2004)

In re: COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.

First State Insurance Company; Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, Appellants

Certain Cancer Claimants, being those individuals identified on a Rule 2019 Disclosure filed in the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware and creditors of Combustion Engineering, Inc., Appellants

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London; Certain London Market Companies, Appellants

Allstate Insurance Company, as successor-in-interest to Northbrook Excess & Surplus Insurance Company, formerly Northbrook Insurance Company, Appellant

Allianz Insurance Company, Appellant

Everest Reinsurance Co., f/k/a Prudential Reinsurance Co., Appellant

Century Indemnity Company (as successor to CCI Insurance Company, successor to Insurance Company of North America); Pacific Employers Insurance Company; Central National Insurance Company of Omaha (solely with respect to policies issued through its managing general agent, Cravens, Dargan & Company, Pacific Coast), Appellants

Onebeacon America Insurance Company, f/k/a Commercial Union Insurance Company, Appellant

North River Insurance Company; TIG Insurance Company, solely as successor by merger to International Insurance Company, Appellants

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London; Certain London Market Companies, Appellants

Everest Reinsurance Co., f/k/a Prudential Reinsurance Co., Appellant

Continental Casualty Company; Transportation Insurance Company, Appellants.

Nos. 03-3392, 03-3415, 03-3425, 03-3436, 03-3445, 03-3446, 03-3450, 03-3558.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

December 2, 2004

Argued June 3, 2004.

Page 191

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 192

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 193

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 194

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 195

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 196

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 197

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 198

Seth P. Waxman, (Argued), Craig Goldblatt, Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale & Dorr, Washington, Michelle K. McMahon, Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz LLP, Wilmington, for Appellants, First State Insurance Company; Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company.

Gregory M. Harvey, (Argued), Montgomery, McCracken, Walker & Rhoads, LLP, Philadelphia, Elizabeth Wall Magner, New Orleans, for Appellants, Certain Cancer Claimants.

Joseph L. Ruby, (Argued), Baach Robinson & Lewis PLLC, Washington, for Appellants, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London; Certain London Market Companies.

James S. Yoder, Wilmington, for Appellants, Allstate Insurance Company; Allianz Insurance Company.

Elit R. Felix, II, Margolis Edelstein, Philadelphia, for Appellant, Allianz Insurance Company.

Joseph L. Schwartz, Riker, Danzig, Scherer, Hyland & Perretti LLP, Morristown, Neil B. Glassman, The Bayard Firm, Wilmington, for Appellant, Everest Reinsurance Co., f/k/a Prudential Reinsurance Co.

Mark D. Plevin, (Argued), Crowell & Moring LLP, Washington, Brian L. Kasprzak, Marks, O'Neill, O'Brien & Courtney, P.C., Wilmington, for Appellants, Century

Page 199

Indemnity Company; Pacific Employers Insurance Company; Central National Insurance Company of Omaha; OneBeacon America Insurance Company f/k/a Commercial Union Insurance Company; The North River Insurance Company; TIG Insurance Company.

Kevin Gross, Rosenthal, Monhait, Gross & Goddess, P.A., Wilmington, Merril J. Hirsh, Thomas T. Locke, Erik M. Pritchard, Ross, Dixon & Bell, L.L.P., Washington, Mohsin N. Khambati, Stephanie A. Petersmarck, McDermott Will & Emery, Chicago, for Appellants, Continental Casualty Company; Transportation Insurance Company.

Laura A. Foggan, Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP, Washington, for Amicus Curiae-Appellant, Complex Insurance Claims Litigation Association.

Laura D. Jones, Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl, Young, Jones & Weintraub, P.C., Wilmington, for Appellee, Combustion Engineering, Inc.

David M. Bernick, (Argued), John Donley, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Chicago, Theodore L. Freedman, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, New York, Christopher Landau, Eric B. Wolff, Kirkland & Ellis LLP, Washington, for Appellee, Asea Brown Boveri, Inc.

Elihu Inselbuch, (Argued), Caplin & Drysdale, New York, Joseph D. Frank, Neal Gerber & Eisenberg, Chicago, Michael R. Lastowski, Duane Morris LLP, Wilmington, for Appellee, The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Combustion Engineering, Inc.

Roger L. Frankel, (Argued), Swidler Berlin Shereff Friedman, LLP, Washington, John C. Phillips, Jr., Phillips, Goldman & Spence, P.A., Wilmington, for Appellee, David T. Austern, Future Claimants' Representative.

Before SCIRICA, Chief Judge, AMBRO and FUENTES, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

SCIRICA, Chief Judge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

OPINION OF THE COURT ...................................................... 199
I. Overview ........................................................... 200
A. Combustion Engineering's Asbestos" Induced Bankruptcy ......... 201
B. Issues Presented on Appeal ................................... 202
II. Background ......................................................... 203
A. Combustion Engineering ....................................... 203
B. The Master Settlement Agreement .............................. 204
C. The Pre "Pack Plan ............................................ 205
D. Plan Voting and Approval ..................................... 207
E. The Bankruptcy Court Proceedings ............................. 208
F. District Court Proceedings and Plan Confirmation ............. 211
G. The Consolidated Appeals ..................................... 213
III. Standing ........................................................... 214
A. Background ................................................... 214
B. Objecting Insurers and London Market Insurers ................ 215
C. Indemnified Insurers ......................................... 220
D. Certain Cancer Claimants ..................................... 223
IV. "Related to" Jurisdiction .......................................... 224
A. Overview ..................................................... 225
B. Jurisdiction Over Independent Claims Against Non"Debtors ..... 227
1. Corporate Affiliation .................................. 227
2. Financial Contributions ................................ 228
3. Related Liability ...................................... 230
4. Shared Insurance ....................................... 232
V. Section 105(a) Equitable Injunction ................................ 233
A. The Requirements of Section 524(g) (4) (A) ..................... 234
B. Section 105(a) ............................................... 235
VI. Two"Trust Structure ................................................ 238
A. Discriminatory Treatment of Claims ........................... 239
B. Creation of the "Stub Claims" ................................ 242
VII. Going Concern Requirement: Section 524(g) (2) (b) (i) (II)............. 248
VIII. Conclusion ......................................................... 248
Page 200 This case involves twelve 1 consolidated appeals from the District Court's order approving Combustion Engineering's bankruptcy Plan of Reorganization under 11 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq. 2 We will vacate and remand. I. Overview For decades, the state and federal judicial systems have struggled with an avalanche of asbestos lawsuits. For reasons well known to observers, a just and efficient resolution of these claims has often eluded our standard legal process--where an injured person with a legitimate claim (where liability and injury can be proven) obtains appropriate compensation without undue cost and undue delay. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 1 (goal "to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every action"). The difficulties with asbestos litigation have been well documented by RAND and others. 3 Efforts to resolve the asbestos problem through global settlement class actions under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b) (3) and 23(b) (1) (B) have so far been unsuccessful. See Amchem Prods. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 117 S.Ct. 2231, 138 L.Ed.2d 689 (1997) (affirming denial of class certification of nationwide settlement class of asbestos claimants); Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp., 527 U.S. 815, 119 S.Ct. 2295, 144 L.Ed.2d 715 (1999) (reversing grant of class certification in Page 201 limited fund class action under Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b) (1) (B)). More than once, the Supreme Court has called on Congress to enact legislation creating a "national asbestos dispute-resolution scheme," but Congress has yet to act. Amchem, 521 U.S. at 598, 117 S.Ct. 2231; Ortiz, 527 U.S. at 822, 119 S.Ct. 2295. For some time now, mounting asbestos liabilities have pushed otherwise viable companies into bankruptcy. The current appeal represents a major effort to extricate a debtor and two non-debtor affiliates from asbestos liability through a prepackaged Chapter 11...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP