Tianja Samuel

Document Type

Research Memorandum

Publication Date




Each year U.S. bankruptcy courts decide hundreds of cases in which debtors, or their trustees, seek to avoid preferential payments. In many of these cases, creditors successfully defend themselves by convincing the court that a statutory safe harbor provision is applicable. The settlement payment defense is one safe harbor provision that—although frequently utilized by creditors—has consistently raised questions about its own scope and applicability. The Second Circuit answered some of these questions, for the first time, in In re Enron Creditors Recovery Corp. In what some believe was an expansive decision, the court held that the settlement payment defense is broad enough to cover the redemption of commercial paper. This memorandum analyzes the history of the settlement payment defense and decides that Enron is really not as expansive as it appears.

Part I of this memorandum identifies the relevant sections of the Bankruptcy Code (“the Code”) and describes the policy concerns behind them. Part II discusses the facts, rules, and rationales of six circuit court decisions that have interpreted the scope of the settlement payment defense. Finally, Part III concludes by comparing Enron to the six decisions discussed in Part II and decides that Enron did not expand the scope of the defense, but merely restated a rule that was already being applied in other circuits.



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.