Bankruptcy Trustee Liability: Is There a Method in the Madness

Mosser v. Darrow, decided over 50 years ago, was the Supreme Court\u27sfirst and only opinion concerning the personal liability of a bankruptcytrustee. Unfortunately, its mandates in the area of bankruptcy trusteeliability are anything but clear, and it has since created uncertainty inthe common law about when a bankruptcy trustee should be personallyliable or immune from suit. Many courts rely on faulty analysis and amisunderstanding of the doctrines and terminology involved withbankruptcy trustee liability. To help guide courts in making moreuniform decisions, that trustees may rely upon to ascertain whether theywill be subject to personal liability, this Article creates a comprehensiveanalytical framework of trustee immunity and liability, which has beenwoven together using the existing threads of analysis suggested byscholars and applied by courts. The Article discusses the four-stepframework in detail, concluding by applying it to a recent case, andarguing that a more reliable result would have been reached by the courthad, it been equipped with a more uniform framework of analysis. Whilethe use of a structured examination of trustee immunity and liabilitymight not always result in the same conclusions, it will hopefully clarifyand unify the analytical process which has been, and continues to be, acontributing factor to the confusion