October Term 2023 · Docket 22-1079

Who qualifies as a party in interest in Chapter 11 bankruptcy?

The dispute centers on whether an insurer paying asbestos claims holds standing to participate in bankruptcy proceedings.

Official caption
Truck Insurance Exchange v. Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc.
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Decided
Sources analyzed through
Post Opinion

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  3. — An official Court opinion was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Yang argued both counterparties and creditors are parties in interest.

    Ms. Ho stated the insurer will pay virtually every dollar owed to claimants.

    Mr. Marshall defined a party in interest as someone with a legal interest in the estate.

    Justice Kagan asked how the at-the-outset rule fits with Article III requirements.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

This case tests the definition of a party in interest under bankruptcy law. The core conflict involves standing to appear in court.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 19, 2024.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Truck Insurance Exchange wants the right to appear and be heard in the bankruptcy case.

Kaiser Gypsum wants to limit participation to those with direct legal interests in the estate.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Truck argues it is a party in interest because it will pay nearly all asbestos claims.

Kaiser argues a party in interest must have a legal interest in the debtor's property.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Sotomayor asked a clarifying question about the legal standard.

Chief Justice Roberts questioned whether Article III standing requires a specific injury to the party itself rather than general dispute resolution among others.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines who can participate in bankruptcy proceedings. It determines the scope of standing for third-party payors. It affects the rights of insurers in asbestos litigation.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Verified official opinions and orders

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Post Opinion ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON