## Facts

- UNR Industries, Inc., a major asbestos manufacturer, filed for Chapter 11 protection while facing tens of thousands of asbestos personal-injury claims.
- A large actuarial estimation project was underway in the bankruptcy case to estimate the aggregate value of asbestos claims for reorganization planning.
- The Official Creditors’ Committee of Asbestos-Related Plaintiffs and an individual claimant moved for an order allowing approximately 17,000 asbestos claims to proceed to trial in the district court.
- The motion relied on the 1984 bankruptcy jurisdiction amendments, including 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 157 and the personal-injury trial provision in § 157(b)(5).
- The dispute centered on whether mass tort claims must be immediately tried in the district court, or may be estimated within the bankruptcy process for plan formulation.

## Issues

1. Whether estimation of UNR’s asbestos personal-injury claims for Chapter 11 plan purposes is a core bankruptcy function that may proceed in the bankruptcy court, notwithstanding § 157(b)(5).
2. Whether § 157(b)(5) requires immediate district-court trials (and valuation through trials) of pending personal-injury tort claims, rather than bankruptcy-court estimation for reorganization.

## Decision

- The district court denied the Committee’s motion to send approximately 17,000 asbestos claims to immediate trial in the district court.
- The court held that § 157(b)(5) governs the forum for trying personal-injury and wrongful-death claims if trials are required, but does not mandate that the district court conduct mass trials at the plan-estimation stage.
- The court permitted the centralized estimation process (including the actuarial study) to continue under the bankruptcy court’s supervision pursuant to the district court’s reference.

## Legal Principles

- Section 157(b)(5) functions primarily as a trial-forum allocation/venue rule for personal-injury tort and wrongful-death claims; it does not transfer every plan-related valuation task to the district court.
- Estimation used to formulate and confirm a Chapter 11 plan may proceed within the bankruptcy process, even when the underlying claims are personal-injury tort claims that would be tried in district court if individually adjudicated.
- “Estimation” for reorganization planning is distinct from “trial” on individual liability and damages; the Act permits bankruptcy administration to continue while preserving district-court trial authority where required.
- District courts retain discretion under §§ 157(a) and 1334(c) regarding referral and abstention, and are not required to withdraw the reference to compel impracticable mass trials as a substitute for aggregate estimation.

## Conclusion

The court refused to order immediate district-court trials of thousands of asbestos personal-injury claims, holding that § 157(b)(5) reserves the forum for trials but does not bar bankruptcy-court-supervised estimation used to develop and confirm a Chapter 11 reorganization plan.


In re UNR Indus., Inc., 45 B.R. 322 (N.D. Ill. 1984)