United States v. Mi Suk Yi

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “[r]eading § 524(c)’s reaffirmation requirements into § 365(p)(2)'s lease assumption procedures is cumbersome, violates all rules of statutory construction, and is not merited”
• \Congress easily could have referenced § 524(c) if it desired debtors to follow that procedure in addition to the lease assumption procedure.\
• \[A]dditions [made] by BAPCPA addressing a debtor's assumption of a lease further clarify that assuming a lease under subsection 365(p)(2) is totally separate from reaffirming a debt under subsection 524(c)\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).