United States Fourth Circuit

The bankruptcy court properly denied a motion to compel a London arbitration where the arbitration is inconsistent with the purpose of the bankruptcy laws to centralize disputes about a chapter 11 debtor's legal obligations and would substantially interfere with the debtor's efforts to reorganize.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/01/2005
• Published 04/01/2005

Judges

• Before WIDENER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:Eugene D. Gulland, Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., for Appellant.  John Joseph Nesius, Spilman, Thomas & Battle, P.L.L.C., Charleston, West Virginia;  John Allen Rollins, Lewis, Glasser, Casey & Rollins, P.L.L.C., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees.   ON BRIEF:Kara L. Cunningham, Steptoe & Johnson, P.L.L.C., Charleston, West Virginia;  Michael St. Patrick Baxter, Dennis B. Auerbach, Michael L. Rosenthal, Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., for Appellant.  Michael G. Sullivan, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees Joseph C. Phillips and Mowbray, L.L.C.