From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re McCarty

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division
Jan 15, 1987
69 B.R. 377 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1987)

Summary

finding that creditor was entitled to the benefit of its bargain and could not be forced to finance the debtor's plan of reorganization

Summary of this case from In re Monarch Beach Venture, Ltd.

Opinion

Bankruptcy No. 85-1088-BK-J-11.

January 15, 1987.

Albert H. Mickler, Jacksonville, Fla., for debtor.

Douglas H. Morford, Jacksonville, Fla., for First Union.


ORDER DENYING CONFIRMATION AND SCHEDULING HEARING PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 1112


At the confirmation hearing on November 4, 1986, the Court found that debtor had satisfied all the requirements of § 1129(a) except subsection (8). Neither secured class number 1, First Union National Bank, f/k/a Atlantic National Bank (hereinafter "First Union") nor secured class number 2, Internal Revenue Service, accepted the proposed plan of reorganization and both classes are impaired under the plan. Accordingly, debtor moved ore tenus to cram down the classes pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1129(b)(2)(A). Subsequent to the hearing, debtor filed a written motion to cram down class number 1 involving First Union which had filed a timely ballot rejecting the plan.

Debtor's motion for cramdown came on for hearing on December 17, 1986. At the hearing, First Union objected stating that the plan of reorganization as presently constituted was not "fair and equitable" within the meaning of § 1129(b) and could not be confirmed.

First Union holds a first lien on property of the estate pursuant to mortgages dated October 30, 1981, and April 6, 1983. Each mortgage provides that First Union holds a lien on the real property together with all rents, issues, and profits. Additionally, each mortgage prohibits debtor/mortgagor from permitting, committing, or suffering waste, impairment or deterioration of the subject property or any part thereof.

According to the Disclosure Statement approved by this Court, debtor intends to fund his plan of reorganization by conducting excavation operations on the property on which First Union holds a first lien and by selling the soil removed from the property. The plan of reorganization does not provide that the lien of First Union will attach to the proceeds of the sale. In fact, the terms of the plan indicate that the proceeds of sale will be used to fund payments to holders of subordinate liens and unsecured creditors.

Based upon argument of and memorandum submitted by counsel, the Court finds:

1. Section 1129(b)(2)(A)(ii) allows sale of property subject to liens securing claims provided such liens attach to the proceeds of such sale.

2. The mortgages of First Union against the subject property entitle First Union to a first lien on the real property and on the proceeds from sale of the soil from such property.

3. Debtor's plan of reorganization fails to provide First Union with a lien on the proceeds from sale of the soil or the indubitable equivalent.

4. First Union is entitled to the benefit of its bargain and cannot be forced to finance debtor's plan of reorganization. See In re Hoff, 54 B.R. 746 (Bkrtcy., D.N.Dak. 1985); In re Elijah, 41 B.R. 348 (Bkrtcy., W.D.Mo. 1984).

5. Debtor's plan of reorganization discriminates unfairly against First Union and cannot be confirmed over the objection of First Union. See In re Duplan Corporation, 9 B.R. 921 (S.D.N.Y. 1980).

Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. Debtor's motion for confirmation and for cramdown is DENIED;

2. Any party who wishes to bring a motion to dismiss or convert before the Court may do so by the filing of an appropriate pleading. The Court will deal further with motions to dismiss or convert filed by an interested party or sua sponte pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) on February 10, 1987, at 1:00 p.m., in Room 240, U.S. Post Office and Courthouse Building, 311 West Monroe Street, Jacksonville, Florida.


Summaries of

In re McCarty

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division
Jan 15, 1987
69 B.R. 377 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1987)

finding that creditor was entitled to the benefit of its bargain and could not be forced to finance the debtor's plan of reorganization

Summary of this case from In re Monarch Beach Venture, Ltd.
Case details for

In re McCarty

Case Details

Full title:In re Vernon McCARTY, Debtor

Court:United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division

Date published: Jan 15, 1987

Citations

69 B.R. 377 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1987)

Citing Cases

In re Scrub Island Dev. Grp. Ltd.

This Court explained in its confirmation ruling that both of the cases relied on by the Bank were easily…

In re Monarch Beach Venture, Ltd.

Id. at 979. See also In re Miami Center Associates, Ltd., 144 B.R. 937, 942 (Bankr.S.D.Fla. 1992); In re EFH…