From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Prosser

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Jul 23, 2010
388 F. App'x 100 (3d Cir. 2010)

Opinion

No. 08-2626.

Submitted pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) December 1, 2009.

OPINION filed: July 23, 2010.

Appeal from the District Court of the Virgin Islands, Division of St. Thomas and St. John (Civil Nos. 07-cv-00105 and 07-cv-106), District Judge: Hon. Curtis V. Gomez, Chief Judge.

Robert F. Craig, Esq., Omaha, NE, Thomas Alkon, Esq., Law Offices of Thomas Alkon, Kevin A. Rames, Esq., Christiansted, St. Croix USVI, for Appellants (D.V.I.07-CV-00106).

Norman A. Abood, Esq., Toledo, OH, Robert F. Craig, Esq., Alex M. Moskowitz, Esq., A.J. Weiss Associates, St. Thomas, VI, for Appellant (D.V.I.07-00105).

Before: McKEE, Chief Judge, FUENTES, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges.


OPINION


Jeffrey J. Prosser and Innovative Communication Company, LLC, appeal from an order of the district court affirming the bankruptcy court's determination that the Terms and Conditions of a Settlement Agreement entered into by Prosser, Emerging Communications, Inc., and Innovative Communication Co. (collectively the "Debtors") and Rural Telephone Finance Cooperative, Greenlight Capital Qualified, L.P., Greenlight Capital, L.P., and Greenlight Capital Offshore, Ltd. . (collectively the "Creditors") is not an executory contract that could be assumed by Prosser and Innovative Communication under the provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 365.

Inasmuch as the background to the execution of the Settlement Agreement is recited 'in the district court's Memorandum and Opinion, we find it unnecessary to repeat it here. See In re Innovative Communication Company, LLC; In re Jeffrey J. Prosser, 2008 WL 2275397 (D.Virgin Islands May 30, 2008). Moreover, in its Memorandum and Opinion, the district court has carefully and fully explained its reasons for affirming the bankruptcy court's holding that the Terms and Conditions of the Settlement Agreement do not constitute an executory contract that could be assumed by Prosser and Innovative Communication pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365. We can add little to the district court's thoughtful analysis and discussion.

Accordingly, we will affirm substantially for the reasons set forth in the district court's Memorandum and Opinion without further elaboration.


Summaries of

In re Prosser

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Jul 23, 2010
388 F. App'x 100 (3d Cir. 2010)
Case details for

In re Prosser

Case Details

Full title:In re Jeffrey J. PROSSER, Appellant (D.V.I.07-cv-00105). In re Innovative…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Jul 23, 2010

Citations

388 F. App'x 100 (3d Cir. 2010)

Citing Cases

Rural Tel. Fin. Coop. v. Prosser (In re Nat'l Rural Utilities Coop. Fin. Corp.)

See In re Innovative Communication Co., LLC, 399 B.R. 152 (Bankr.D.V.I.2008); 2008 WL 2275397, (D.V.I., May…

Nat'l Rural Utilities Coop. Fin. Corp. v. Prosser

(This court's determination that it was not assumable was affirmed on appeal. See In re Innovative…