Harvey\u27s Silence (Symposium: Letters to the Commission)

Harvey Miller has a reputation as a leading bankruptcy lawyer, and he deserves it. As his criticism shows, he understands why and how the Code changed the Act in 1978 and how the drafters of Chapter 11 erred. Better than all but a handful of other lawyers, Harvey Miller knows how to manipulate Chapter 11 to serve his clients\u27 interests. He understands both the legal and practical intricacies of Chapter 11. Were I the CEO of a large and troubled company, I would hire Harvey Miller and gladly pay him twice what most other bankruptcy lawyers would charge. In short, Harvey Miller is a Chapter 11 virtuoso. And for those same reasons, Harvey Miller cannot be a true critic of Chapter 11

Harvey\u27s Silence (Symposium: Letters to the Commission)

Harvey Miller has a reputation as a leading bankruptcy lawyer, and he deserves it. As his criticism shows, he understands why and how the Code changed the Act in 1978 and how the drafters of Chapter 11 erred. Better than all but a handful of other lawyers, Harvey Miller knows how to manipulate Chapter 11 to serve his clients\u27 interests. He understands both the legal and practical intricacies of Chapter 11. Were I the CEO of a large and troubled company, I would hire Harvey Miller and gladly pay him twice what most other bankruptcy lawyers would charge. In short, Harvey Miller is a Chapter 11 virtuoso. And for those same reasons, Harvey Miller cannot be a true critic of Chapter 11

Comments on a Revised Filing System

Professor Edward Adams\u27s article, both in terms of its basic structure and the myriad of options it offers, neatly highlights the basic dilemma facing the Drafting Committee as it addresses the future Article 9 filing system. As he correctly notes, the filing system\u27s shortcomings are largely due to its continued dependence on paper records, despite the increasing sophistication and availability of computerized information technology for both filing and searching. Should the Drafting Committee maintain the basics of the current system (a public, paper-based filing system) and merely attempt to identify and correct the existing shortcomings in that system, with some limited use of new information technology? Or should the Committee take a more aggressive approach and attempt to cure the “systemic” defects Professor Adams identifies in the current system

Amending the Article Nine Filing System to Meet Current Deficiencies

Article Nine\u27 is currently undergoing substantial revision. [B]ecause secured credit is a trillion-dollar activity, this revision is extraordinarily significant. A focal point of this amendment process is Article Nine\u27s notice-filing system which apprises prospective creditors, and others, of a secured party\u27s interest in a debtor\u27s collateral.\u27 As few would dispute, the notice-filing system, which seeks to cure the ostensible ownership problem, is in serious need of repair

The Stein Years--A Time of Advancement and Prosperity

When the seven-year administrationof the school\u27s sixth dean,CarlA Auerbach,ended,thenewLawSchoolbuildinghad become a reality, and Dean Auerbach\u27s principal goal was achieved. As Auerbachpassedthe torchto RobertA Stein, how- ever, he did so amid controversy and widespreadfrustration at the Law School with the legislatureregardingbudgets and class size. Stein,atageforty,wasyoung,energetic,andableto achieve the balanceofwhatDeanAuerbach termed scholarlyattainment with administrativesavvy. As Stein ascended to the ranks of what he describedas thebest law school deanshipopportunity in the country, \u27 he was unanimously viewed as an extremely ener- getic, enthusiasticand responsive man. 2 Chosen because he was perceived by both faculty members and administratorsalike as an open, easygoingperson who was able to communicate effec- tively, Dean Stein\u27s optimism proved to be the perfect ingredient for the Law School at the time