A Fresh Start to Bankruptcy Exemptions

Bankruptcy has broadly failed to deliver “fresh starts” to debtors. Too often, debtors return to states of financial distress following bankruptcy. Although bankruptcy delivers a clean slate through the discharge of debts, the efficacy of a fresh start depends on a second factor: property exemptions. While discharge frees a debtor from her existing debts, property exemptions determine what property the debtor retains upon exiting bankruptcy. For many debtors, insufficient and suboptimal property exemption laws undermine fresh starts. In fact, under current bankruptcy law, each state can reject federal bankruptcy exemptions by opting out. Bankrupt debtors in “opt-out” states are forced to rely on general state exemptions—often stingy and focused on preserving homesteads—that were not designed for bankruptcy. Existing literature explores two lines of criticism against the federal opt-out provision: (1) arguing that the law should be struck down as repugnant to constitutional notions of uniformity, supremacy, or both, and (2) making the case for repeal on normative and fairness grounds. For decades, neither solution has been forthcoming. The opt-out scheme, at first aberrant and controversial, has proved a perdurable feature of bankruptcy law. This Article advances a different approach and proposes diffusive, state-based reform solutions. Under this approach, each opt-out state would undertake a meaningful review of its existing exemptions regime in light of the federally declared rehabilitative function of bankruptcy. I propose a model, to be used in this review, involving three factors— housing agnosticism, nominal sufficiency, and allocative flexibility—as a conceptual framework for reforms. Addressing constitutional concerns, this Article argues that these innovative “bankruptcy-specific exemptions” schemes should survive constitutional scrutiny. The Article ends with discussion of the model and proposed reform framework

A Fresh Start to Bankruptcy Exemptions

Bankruptcy has broadly failed to deliver fresh starts to debtors Too often debtors return to states of financial distress following bankruptcy Although bankruptcy delivers a clean slate through the discharge of debts the efficacy of a fresh start depends on a second factor property exemptions While discharge frees a debtor from her existing debts property exemptions determine what property the debtor retains upon exiting bankruptcy For many debtors insufficient and suboptimal property exemption laws undermine fresh starts In fact under current bankruptcy law each state can reject federal bankruptcy exemptions by opting out Bankrupt debtors in optout states are forced to rely on general state exemptions ”often stingy and focused on preserving homesteads ”that were not designed for bankruptcybrbrExisting literature explores two lines of criticism against the federal optout provision 1 arguing that the law should be struck down as repugnant to constitutional notions of uniformity supremacy or both and 2 making the case for repeal on normative and fairness grounds For decades neither solution has been forthcoming The optout scheme at first aberrant and controversial has proved a perdurable feature of bankruptcy lawbrbrThis Article advances a different approach and proposes diffusive statebased reform solutions Under this approach each optout state would undertake a meaningful review of its existing exemptions regime in light of the federallydeclared rehabilitative function of bankruptcy I propose a model to be used in this review involving three factors ”nominal sufficiency housing agnosticism and allocative flexibility as a conceptual framework for reforms Addressing constitutional concerns this Article argues that these innovative bankruptcyspecific exemptions schemes should survive constitutional scrutiny The Article ends with discussion of the model and proposed reform frameworkb

Purchasers Lacking Privity Overcoming The Rule for Express Warranty Claims: Expanding Judicial Application of Common Law Theories and Liberal Interpretation of U.C.C. Section 2-318

The doctrine of privity has dogged contract plaintiffs for several hundred years, but it has been even more challenging for the courts. Never being fully satisfied with one take on it, courts have oscillated back and forth from allowing third-party suits to almost entirely prohibiting them. Even when the doctrine was at its strongest, the courts found ways to avoid its often inequitable dictates. The question seemed to be answered for sales contracts upon the promulgation and adoption of U.C.C. section 2-318. Many states, however, considered the provision unsatisfactory, and it was soon replaced by a set of three alternatives with varying sizes to their protected classes. Several other states adopted non-uniform hybrid versions of section 2- 318. Despite the efforts of the U.C.C. \u27s drafters to unify the law of contract across jurisdictions, the area surrounding the doctrine of privity and its effect on the rights of third-party purchasers is still a confusing mass of complex exceptions and acrobatic legal workarounds. This Article examines the states wrangling over competing versions of section 2-318 and the ever-expanding use of alternative common law theories by courts, specifically concerning the law of express warranties, without focusing on the already heavily commented-on question of whether privity should exist at all. After briefly addressing the history of privity and warranty, this Article covers four ways in which courts allow circumvention of the law of privity when it dictates an inequitable result: liberal interpretation of U.C.C. statutory provisions, construal of direct advertisement as contractual privity, application of common law assignment, and an emerging use of common law third-party beneficiary law. This Article addresses each method in detail, synthesizing historical underpinnings and emerging trends, and provides guidance on each method\u27s applicability to various transactional and situational scenarios

Antimicrobial Interventions and Application Time Effects on Ground Beef Quality

Small business meat processors can use organic acid antimicrobial interventions to control Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) when producing ground beef; however, many small producers are concerned about the impact on ground beef quality. The effects of two commonly used organic acids, lactic acid and peroxyacetic acid, were evaluated at short (15 seconds) or extended (3 minutes) raw material dip times on ground beef quality parameters. Beef trim dipped in lactic acid for 3 minutes had a reduction in total aerobic bacteria plate count, but also increased ground beef discoloration and lipid oxidation during retail display. Use of a shorter dip time showed minimal differences in ground beef quality compared to untreated controls. In addition, dipping lean trim in peroxyacetic acid for 3 minutes slowed ground beef discoloration during display. Therefore, processors should consider either type of organic acid, and the length of lean trim exposure to organic acid during dipping, to optimize shelf life quality attributes

Antimicrobial Interventions and Application Time Effects on Ground Beef Quality

Small business meat processors can use organic acid antimicrobial interventions to control Shiga toxin-producing E. coli (STEC) when producing ground beef; however, many small producers are concerned about the impact on ground beef quality. The effects of two commonly used organic acids, lactic acid and peroxyacetic acid, were evaluated at short (15 seconds) or extended (3 minutes) raw material dip times on ground beef quality parameters. Beef trim dipped in lactic acid for 3 minutes had a reduction in total aerobic bacteria plate count, but also increased ground beef discoloration and lipid oxidation during retail display. Use of a shorter dip time showed minimal differences in ground beef quality compared to untreated controls. In addition, dipping lean trim in peroxyacetic acid for 3 minutes slowed ground beef discoloration during display. Therefore, processors should consider either type of organic acid, and the length of lean trim exposure to organic acid during dipping, to optimize shelf life quality attributes

Influence of sodium chloride reduction and replacement with potassium chloride based salts on the sensory and physico-chemical characteristics of pork sausage patties

This study evaluated the effects of sodium chloride reduction and replacement with potassium chloride or modified potassium chloride based salts using a weight or molar equivalent basis on the sensory and physicochemical properties of pork sausage patties. Three independent replications of pork sausage patties were manufactured to compare five treatments: full sodium, reduced sodium, modified potassium chloride weight based replacement, modified potassium chloride molar based replacement, and standard potassium chloride weight based replacement. Salt replacement did not affect (P \u3e 0.05) moisture, protein, fat, textural properties, lipid oxidation, or redness. Sausage patties with modified potassium chloride were more acceptable than those with standard potassium chloride (P \u3c 0.001). Using modified potassium chloride replaced on a molar equivalent basis resulted in samples with more similar sensory characteristics to the full sodium control than replacement on a weight equivalent basis. The use of modified potassium chloride reduced sodium and improved sodium:potassium ratios while other changes in composition or physico-chemical characteristics were minimal