You still do not get it

The case is about bankruptcy law.
Before filing the bankruptcy petition, the employee has lots of ways to collect his previously earned salary. However, after the bankruptcy filing in US or Canada, any effort of collection other than filing with the bankruptcy court would be estopped by the petition. The estoppell is a very wide one. It even applies in perfecting a lien, bringing action in any other courts, foreclosure sales, and etc. This is called Automatic Stay under 11 USC Sec 362. And there is penalty in bankruptcy code for willful violation of the stay, such as suing the company in another court.
So upon filing, the employee's only remedy is filing his claim with the bankruptcy court.
P.S. Bankruptcy is a total different ball game.

所有跟帖： 

• No, You are the one that just doesn't get it! -iammadaboutu- ♂ (539 bytes) () 02/03/2009 postreply 05:54:08

• 您不要那麼著急,老貓如果回答的不對,懂得人當然應該指出來. -單身老貓- ♂ (342 bytes) () 02/03/2009 postreply 07:01:10

• 回复：No, You are the one that just doesn't get it! -sjy0627- ♂ (898 bytes) () 02/03/2009 postreply 19:32:44

• 多来给同胞出出主意.我们太需要您这样的法律知识了... -iammadaboutu- ♂ (703 bytes) () 02/04/2009 postreply 07:41:36

• ?! -zclearwater- ♀ (0 bytes) () 02/03/2009 postreply 20:09:26

• ?! -zclearwater- ♀ (0 bytes) () 02/03/2009 postreply 20:11:42

• ?! 是我回答iammadaboutu 的评论，但一再错跟了对方。对不起。 -zclearwater- ♀ (0 bytes) () 02/03/2009 postreply 20:16:47

• 您是對的,老貓應該說清楚,上面回答指的是 WARN Act. -單身老貓- ♂ (514 bytes) () 02/03/2009 postreply 07:09:06