Authors

Emma Skeen, William & Mary Law School

Relief and Its Costs: The Need for a Congressional Response to the Aftermath of Harrington v. Purdue Pharma

Abstract

This Note explores the fallout of the Harrington v. Purdue Pharma decision and the uncertainty it lends to the future of bankruptcy plans and third-party releases. Specifically, it proposes potential congressional solutions that can pave a path forward for parties to seek relief for the harms they have suffered under the actions of corporations and their leaders. Part I provides background information on the use of nonconsensual third-party releases in bankruptcy cases and their controversial nature. Part II analyzes the Supreme Court’s settling of that controversy in Harrington and the bases that it relied on in doing so. Part III argues that the Court’s ruling has serious policy implications that will prevent victimized parties from seeking and obtaining needed relief. Finally, Part IV suggests potential solutions that Congress can pursue to allow such victims to receive relief from third parties in bankruptcy cases.

This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

Repository Citation

Emma Skeen, Relief and Its Costs: The Need for a Congressional Response to the Aftermath of Harrington v. Purdue Pharma, 67 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 313 (2025), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol67/iss1/7