Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2025
Abstract
In a study of venue for the one hundred ninety-five large, public company bankruptcies filed from 2012 through 2021, I discovered nine cases (5 percent) in which the companies’ venue claims were in apparent conflict with what the debtors themselves stated on their petitions to be the locations of the companies’ principal places of business and principal assets. Nor were the venue claims justified by domicile. Eight of the nine proceeded to confirmation in an improper venue.
Although it is routine for large, public companies and the courts in which they file to ignore the Bankruptcy Code and Rules, these cases take Chapter 11’s lawlessness to a new level. Top officers of large, public companies, with the advice of counsel, signed apparently false venue claims under penalty of perjury.
This Article analyzes the nine cases and concludes that (1) no apparent basis for the venue claims in seven of the nine cases exists, and (2) the apparent basis for the venue claims in one of the other two cases is both legally implausible and in conflict with the relevant facts stated in the petitions. Because private companies were not included in this study, these nine cases are probably a minority of the big cases in which false venue claims were signed under penalty of perjury. The carelessness regarding venue in these cases shows the depth to which the competition for big cases has taken a few United States Bankruptcy Courts.
Recommended Citation
Lynn M. LoPucki, False Venue Claims Signed Under Penalty of Perjury, 80 Bus. Law. 689 (2025)