Jeff owes Sam $140, and owes Harry $80. Jeff declares bankruptcy, because he has only $100, and the decision of how to divide his $100 between Harry and Sam comes before a court. The court is composed of a three-judge panel, John, Clarence, and Ruth.

John is convinced that the most proper division is [40: 60], using the following reasoning. "There is no dispute over the first $20," he claims, "because both agree that they go to Sam. Regarding the remaining 80, both parties have legitimate claims, and they must therefore divide that sum equally between them."

Clarence, in contrast, claims that the most proper division is [20: 80], explaining: "Suppose each of them could take the amount owed to him, $80 to Harry and $140 to Sam. That would lead to a deficit of $120. This deficit should be divided equally between the creditors; i.e., each of them should yield $60 of what he claims."12 Ruth claims that the most proper division is [44.44: 55.55], since "The total sum should be divided proportionally to the debts owed: Harry should get 80 80+140 × 100, not a penny more or less."

For each judge, describe a solution concept to bankruptcy problems with n creditors that is consistent with his or her solution for the bankruptcy problem with two creditors.