The Uneasy Case for the Priority of Secured Claims in Bankruptcy: Further Thoughts and a Reply to Critics

Bebchuk, Lucian A.; Fried, Jesse M.

Download This Paper

Open PDF in Browser

Add Paper to My Library

The Uneasy Case for the Priority of Secured Claims in Bankruptcy: Further Thoughts and a Reply to Critics

NBER Working Paper No. w6472

70 Pages Posted: 11 Jun 2000 Last revised: 10 Mar 2022

See all articles by Lucian A. Bebchuk

Lucian A. Bebchuk

Harvard Law School; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI); National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

Jesse M. Fried

Harvard Law School; European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI)

There are 2 versions of this paper

Date Written: March 1998

Abstract

In an earlier article, The Uneasy Case for the Priority of Secured Claims in Bankruptcy,' 105 Yale Law Journal 857 (1996), we suggested that the case for a full priority of secured claims in bankruptcy is an uneasy one. In this paper, we address various reactions and objections to our analysis that have been offered by subsequent work. We also further develop some of the main elements of the analysis in our earlier article with respect to both our analysis of the comparative merits of full and partial priority and our analysis of how a partial priority regime could be implemented. The analysis confirms our earlier conclusion that the case for a full priority of secured claims in bankruptcy is an uneasy one.

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Bebchuk, Lucian A. and Fried, Jesse M., The Uneasy Case for the Priority of Secured Claims in Bankruptcy: Further Thoughts and a Reply to Critics (March 1998). NBER Working Paper No. w6472, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=226217