United States Third Circuit

The language used in 11 U.S.C. section 502(b) does not clearly and unambiguously require discounting an interest-bearing obligation to present value in light of the words' plain meanings and the language used elsewhere in the Bankruptcy Code. Interest-bearing debt should not be discounted to present value after unmatured interest has been disallowed pursuant to section 502(b)(2).

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/21/2006
• Decided 06/09/2006
• Published 06/09/2006

Judges

• Before McKEE, SMITH, and VAN ANTWERPEN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• G. Eric Brunstad, Jr. (Argued), Timothy B. DeSieno, Rheba Rutkowski, Bingham McCutchen LLP, Hartford, CT, Russell C. Silberglied, Jason M. Madron, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE, John J. Galban, Seward & Kissel LLP, New York, NY, for Appellants in 05-2032 & 05-2033., Robert J. Dehney, Gilbert R. Saydah, Jr., Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell, Wilmington, DE, Robert J. Stark, Brown Rudnick Berlack Israels, New York, NY, for OHC Liquidation.


• For Appellees:
  
• Michael B. Fisco (Argued), Faegre & Benson LLP, Minneapolis, MN, Karen C. Bifferato, Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz LLP, Wilmington, DE, for Appellee U.S. Bank National Association.