In re Sutton

4 Citing cases

  1. In re Walker

    165 B.R. 994 (E.D. Va. 1994)   Cited 55 times
    Finding that under ยง 105 a court may impose conditions as a basis for confirming a chapter 11 plan

    Several courts have confronted this issue and have determined that the absence of an adequate means of implementation demonstrates a lack of good faith thereby precluding confirmation of the plan of reorganization. For example, in In re Sutton, 78 B.R. 341 (Bankr.S.D.Fla. 1987), the Amended Plan provided for the satisfaction of the claims of all creditors upon the sale of shares of stock in the debtor's business. The plan provided a minimum sales price to be realized within 120 days from the date of confirmation.

  2. In re Hawkins

    Case No. 11-04495-dd (Bankr. D.S.C. Feb. 21, 2013)

    "); In re Calvanese, 169 B.R. 104, 107 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1994) ("In the clear majority of cases considering such or similar plans, bankruptcy courts have refused to confirm plans which keep creditors 'on hold' without receipt of payments while the debtor seeks to sell real estate which it has been unable to sell in years past."); In re Sutton, 78 B.R. 341, 342 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1987) ("Debtor's chapter 11 plan . . . boils down to nothing more than an announced hope that he will sell his stock by February 6, 1988 for enough to satisfy the debt to the corporation, which was fixed by judgment against him 15 months before that date. He has produced no specific offer of purchase, no specific sale date, and no credible basis to value the stock. He asks this court to hold the corporate creditor at bay another five months from today to see if he can do what he hopes to do, but has failed to do the past ten months.

  3. In re Swiggett

    Case No. 12-81015C-11D (Bankr. M.D.N.C. Sep. 10, 2012)

    An attempt to use a bankruptcy filing for such a purpose is an abuse of the bankruptcy process which warrants the dismissal of a Chapter 11 filing. See In re Donuts of Seekonk, 122 B.R. 172 (Bankr. D.R.I. 1990); In re Edwards, 140 B.R. 515 (Bankr. W.D. Mo. 1992); In re Sutton, 78 B.R. 341 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1987}. The present case involves a classic two-party dispute which is resolvable in the trial court.

  4. In re Crown Financial, Ltd.

    183 B.R. 719 (Bankr. M.D.N.C. 1995)   Cited 7 times
    Dismissing Chapter 11 filing for abuse of the bankruptcy process

    An attempt to do so is an abuse of the bankruptcy process which warrants the dismissal of a Chapter 11 filing. See In re Donuts of Seekonk, 122 B.R. 172 (Bankr.D.R.I. 1990); In re Edwards, 140 B.R. 515 (Bankr.W.D.Mo. 1992); In re Sutton, 78 B.R. 341 (Bankr.S.D.Fla. 1987). Where a debtor's reorganization effort involves essentially a two-party dispute which can be resolved in state court, and the filing for relief under Chapter 11 is intended to frustrate or delay the legitimate efforts of creditors to enforce their rights against the debtor, dismissal for cause is warranted.