Legal Opinion
In Re Pittsburgh Corning Corp.
United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania
Decided December 21, 2006No. 16-21249PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION 2
JUDITH K. FITZGERALD, Bankruptcy Judge.
Introduction
The matter before the court is the confirmation of the Second Amended Plan of Debtor Pittsburgh Corning Corporation (hereafter “PCC” or “the Debtor”). We find that the plan is unconfirmable as over-inclusive under the Court of Appeals’ decision in In re Combustion Engineering, 391 F.3d 190 (3d Cir.2004). The plan would channel the independent claims against PPG and Corning, which it may not do. We repeat much of the same evidence throughout this Memorandum Opinion for the sake of pinpointing relevant evidence to the issue…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- In Re Pacor, Inc. v. John Higgins, Jr. And Louise HigginsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- McConnell v. Federal Election CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- In Re: Combustion Engineering, Inc. First State Insurance Company Hartford Accident and Indemnity CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2004
- In Re Dow Corning CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- In Re Resorts International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2004
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- In re W.R. Grace & Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 2012
- Evelyn Nye v. Bayer Cropscience, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- In Re Federal-Mogul Global Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2012
- Cont'l Cas. Co. v. Carr (In Re W.R. Grace & Co.)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
- In Re Pittsburgh Corning Corp.United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2011
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.