Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'n v. 203 North LaSalle Street Partnership

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided May 3, 1999No. 97-1418Published

1Concurring in the judgmentJustice Thomas

I agree with the majority’s conclusion that the reorganization plan in this case could not be confirmed. However, I do *459not see the need for its unnecessary speculations on certain issues and do not share its approach to interpretation of the Bankruptcy Code. I therefore concur only in the judgment.

H-i

Our precedents make clear that an analysis of any statute, including the Bankruptcy Code, must not begin with external sources, but with the text itself. See, e. g., Connecticut Nat. Bank v. Germain, 503 U. S. 249, 253-254 (1992); Union Bank v. Wolas, 502 U. S. 151, 154 (1991). The relevant Code…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Connecticut National Bank v. GermainSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Dewsnup v. TimmSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  4. U.S. Bancorp Mortgage Co. v. Bonner Mall PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Midlantic National Bank v. New Jersey Department of Environmental ProtectionSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API