⇐  2008 Index  |  ⇐  TOC  |  Next Page   ⇒

2008 NORTON BANKRUPTCY LAW SEMINAR MATERIALS

Appellate Court Decisions Related
To Bankruptcy Cases

By William Norton, III

payment in the event of a bankruptcy filing.)

30. 365(f) Executory Contracts -- Assignments

In re Fleming Companies, Inc., 499 F.3d 300 (3d Cir. Aug. 22, 2007) (Debtor may not assume and assign executory contract when proposed assignee does not intend to comply with a material and economically significant term of contract. Executory contract required debtor to provide products to grocery retailer from a certain facility. Debtor sought to assume and assign the contract, but, at the direction of the proposed assignee, debtor rejected the lease of the facility that the contract required the assignee to use. Non-debtor grocery retailer objected, arguing that the proposed assignment did not provide adequate assurance of future performance as required by S 365(f)(2)(B), and the appellate court agreed.)

31. 366 Utility Deposits

In re Darby, 470 F.3d 573 (5th Cir. Nov. 14, 2006) (Chapter 13 debtor could not compel Time Warner to provide cable service, even if he provided adequate assurance of payment and a deposit, because cable is not a "utility" pursuant to S 366.)

32. 502(b) Claims -- Allowance

In re National Energy & Gas Transmission, Inc., 492 F.3d 297 (4th Cir. July 10, 2007) (Creditor recovered, from a non-debtor surety, the full amount of the creditor's principal claim against the bankrupt debtor. The creditor applied the funds to interest first and then attempted to recover the remaining portion of the claim in the bankruptcy as unpaid principal. The claim was barred as a collection of interest pursuant to S 502(b)(2). Although the creditor could apply and classify the payment differently under non-bankruptcy law, the Bankruptcy Code could deem it to be an impermissible interest claim against the debtor by looking to the circumstances of the claim, which in this case was increased only due to the accrual of interest.)

In re Gencarelli, 501 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. Aug. 30, 2007) (In the case of a solvent debtor, lender is entitled to receive contractual pre-payment penalty to the extent penalty is enforceable under state law. As part of bankruptcy case, debtor's assets were sold at auction, the proceeds of which were sufficient to pay all creditors in full with interest. A multi-million dollar surplus remained. Lender was repaid following the auction, triggering the pre-payment penalty. Section 506 provides rules for determining whether and to what extent a claim is secured, but does not answer the question

 

⇐  2008 Index  |  ⇐  TOC  |  Next Page   ⇒

Copyright 2007 Norton Institutes