Changeflow GovPing Courts & Legal Third Circuit Rules on Whittaker Clark & Daniel...
Routine Enforcement Amended Final

Third Circuit Rules on Whittaker Clark & Daniels Bankruptcy Appeal

Favicon for www2.ca3.uscourts.gov 3rd Circuit Precedential Opinions
Filed
Detected
Email

Summary

The Third Circuit granted the petition for panel rehearing filed by the Official Committee of Talc Claimants in the Whittaker Clark & Daniels Inc. bankruptcy proceedings. The amended majority opinion was revised throughout in response to arguments set out in the Committee's petition, though the revisions do not affect the disposition of the appeal and the original judgments remain as filed. The petition for rehearing en banc was denied by all available circuit judges.

Published by 3rd Circuit on www2.ca3.uscourts.gov . Detected, standardized, and enriched by GovPing. Review our methodology and editorial standards .

About this source

GovPing monitors 3rd Circuit Precedential Opinions for new courts & legal regulatory changes. Every update since tracking began is archived, classified, and available as free RSS or email alerts — 25 changes logged to date.

Notice an inaccuracy or want this record removed? Email corrections@changeflow.com . We respond within 48 hours and honor reasonable requests. See our editorial standards .

What changed

The Third Circuit granted panel rehearing in this bankruptcy appeal involving talc-related claims against Whittaker Clark & Daniels Inc., allowing the Official Committee of Talc Claimants to challenge the original panel decision. The amended majority opinion was revised to address arguments raised in the petition, though the underlying disposition and judgments remain unchanged. Rehearing en banc was denied.

Affected parties—including the various Brenntag entities named as appellees—should note that while the panel opinion has been revised, the original judgments remain in effect. The denial of en banc rehearing indicates the full circuit did not find the panel's legal analysis sufficiently problematic to warrant review by all judges.

Archived snapshot

Apr 28, 2026

GovPing captured this document from the original source. If the source has since changed or been removed, this is the text as it existed at that time.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT Nos. 24-2210, 24-2211 & 25-1044 IN RE: WHITTAKER CLARK & DANIELS INC., Debtor WHITTAKER CLARK & DANIELS INC; BRILLIANT NATIONAL SERVICES INC; L.A. TERMINALS INC.; SOCO WEST INC.

BRENNTAG AG; BRENNTAG CANADA INC.; BRENNTAG GREAT LAKES LLC; BRENNTAG MID-SOUTH INC.; BRENNTAG NORTH AMERICA INC.; BRENNTAG NORTHEAST INC.; BRENNTAG PACIFIC INC.; BRENNTAG SOUTHEAST INC.; BRENNTAG SOUTHWEST INC.; BRENNTAG SPECIALTIES LLC (f/k/a Brenntag Specialties, Inc., and as Mineral and Pigment Solutions, Inc.); COASTAL CHEMICAL CO. LLC; MINERAL PIGMENT SOLUTIONS INC.; THOSE PARTIES LISTED ON APPENDIX A TO THE COMPLAINT; JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-1000; Official Committee of Talc Claimants, Appellant (Amended Pursuant to Court Order of 4/7/25) (District Court Nos. 312-3:23-bk-13575; 0312-3:23-cv-04151; 312-3-3:23-cv-04156 ) Present: SHWARTZ, KRAUSE, RESTREPO, BIBAS, PORTER, MATEY, PHIPPS, FREEMAN, MONTGOMERY-REEVES, CHUNG, BOVE, MASCOTT, Circuit Judges and AMBRO, Senior Judge 1

Judge Ambro's vote is limited to panel rehearing. 1

ORDER

The petition for panel rehearing filed by appellant, Official Committee of Talc

Claimants, in the above-entitled cases having been submitted to the judges who

participated in the decision of this Court, panel rehearing is granted. The Clerk is directed to file the amended opinions contemporaneously with this order. The amended majority opinion was revised throughout in response to the arguments set out in Committee's petition. The amended concurring opinions were revised to reflect formatting and internal cross-reference changes throughout. As the revisions to the amended majority opinion do not affect the disposition of the appeal, the judgments will remain as filed. The petition for rehearing en banc filed by appellant, Official Committee of Talc

Claimants, in the above-entitled cases having been submitted to all available circuit

judges of the circuit in regular active service, and no judge of the circuit in regular active service, asked for rehearing en banc, rehearing en banc is denied.

BY THE COURT, s/Thomas L. Ambro Circuit Judge Dated: April 27, 2026 cc: All Counsel of Record

Get daily alerts for 3rd Circuit Precedential Opinions

Daily digest delivered to your inbox.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

About this page

What is GovPing?

Every important government, regulator, and court update from around the world. One place. Real-time. Free. Our mission

What's from the agency?

Source document text, dates, docket IDs, and authority are extracted directly from 3rd Circuit.

What's AI-generated?

The summary, classification, recommended actions, deadlines, and penalty information are AI-generated from the original text and may contain errors. Always verify against the source document.

Last updated

Classification

Agency
3rd Circuit
Filed
April 27th, 2026
Instrument
Enforcement
Branch
Judicial
Legal weight
Binding
Stage
Final
Change scope
Minor
Docket
312-3:23-bk-13575 0312-3:23-cv-04151 312-3-3:23-cv-04156

Who this affects

Applies to
Courts Legal professionals
Industry sector
9211 Government & Public Administration
Activity scope
Bankruptcy proceedings Appellate procedure Creditor claims
Geographic scope
United States US

Taxonomy

Primary area
Bankruptcy
Operational domain
Legal
Topics
Civil Rights Healthcare

Get alerts for this source

We'll email you when 3rd Circuit Precedential Opinions publishes new changes.

Free. Unsubscribe anytime.

You're subscribed!