Introduction
In In re Brick House Properties, Bk. No. 20-26250, (Bankr. D. Utah June 11, 2021), the U.S. States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Utah denied a debtor's motion to reject its prepetition contract for the sale of real property under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code. The bankruptcy court found that because the debtor was already subject to a state court-specific performance order compelling it to take the ancillary steps necessary to close the sale, the contract was no longer executory and could not be rejected.In Bankruptcy, Rejection of Prepetition Contracts Is Not Automatic
The bankruptcy court found that because the debtor was already subject to a state court-specific performance order compelling it to take the ancillary steps necessary to close the sale, the contract was no longer executory and could not be rejected.
December 23, 2021 at 12:54 PM
8 minute read
Bankruptcy|
Introduction
In In re Brick House Properties, Bk. No. 20-26250, (Bankr. D. Utah June 11, 2021), the U.S. States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Utah denied a debtor's motion to reject its prepetition contract for the sale of real property under Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code. The bankruptcy court found that because the debtor was already subject to a state court-specific performance order compelling it to take the ancillary steps necessary to close the sale, the contract was no longer executory and could not be rejected.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMembership Has Its Privileges: Bankruptcy Court Examines LLC's Authority to File Bankruptcy
8 minute readThe 'Next Battleground' in Chapter 11: Third Circuit Set to Weigh Opt-Out Releases
5 minute readOffit Kurman Scores Summary Judgment in Long-Running Legal Mal Suit Over Bankruptcy Fallout
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Court Rules Mere Conduit Defense Not Suitable for a Motion to Dismiss
- 2Ironclad Officially Launches New Gen AI Assistant Jurist
- 3After Litigation with Ex-COO, Proskauer Fills Role
- 4Federal Judge Sends Novel Damages Question in Employment Dispute to State Court
- 5Trade Secret Litigation: How Will AI Innovations Likely Be Litigated?
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250