Private equity has become a dominant force in distressed investing and Chapter 11 corporate reorganization. As a result, three new types of attorney conflicts have emerged, each of which threatens to undermine the efficacy and credibility of the bankruptcy system. Bankruptcy judges, practitioners, and scholars must respond. This Comment provides those stakeholders with a doctrinal and normative framework to understand the conflicts that pervade the system. In particular, this Comment defines three types of conflicts, explains how each threatens the functionality of Chapter 11 corporate restructuring, lays the doctrinal groundwork for a new understanding of attorney disinterestedness, and provides solutions to mitigate the relevant conflicts. In doing so, this Comment provides much-needed guidance to bankruptcy stakeholders who are keen to ensure debtor estates receive competent, loyal, and zealous representation.
Articles Editor, University of Pennsylvania Law Review Volume 172; J.D. Candidate University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, Class of 2024; B.A. Emory University, 2018. Thank you first and foremost to Professor Vincent Buccola for academic guidance and personal friendship. I also thank Professors David Skeel, David Hoffman, and Kate Shaw for their feedback on my draft and support throughout the drafting process. Most importantly, thank you to my close friends in the Articles Office: Kirsten Hanlon, Carolyn Hartwick, Brian Tracz, Anna Statz, and Miles Gray. It is an honor to be published alongside the scholarship we selected together.