green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
8.8 score
“congress has plainly provided for the rejection of executory contracts, notwithstanding the obvious adverse consequences for contracting parties thereby made inevitable”
Treatment trajectory · 1986 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1986
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 28 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
In Re Dunes Hotel Associates
congress has plainly provided for the rejection of executory contracts, notwithstanding the obvious adverse consequences for contracting parties thereby made inevitable
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Larry D. Wiegman
Accord United States v. Petty Motor Co., 767 F.2d 712, 715 (10th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1056 , 106 S.Ct. 1284 , 89 L.Ed.2d 591 (1986). *78 The sale in this case appears to be a hybrid between the classic judicial sale described in Weir, 339 F.2d at 85 , and an execution sale.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Larry D. Wiegman Carla J. Wiegman Bruce W. Van Zee, Doing Business as Riverside Animal Hospital John C. Dean, Co-Executor of the Estate of Ray L. Thomas Wade Rubey, Co-Executor of the Estate of Ray L. Thomas Leon G. Wiegman Edna H. Wiegman Dwight A. Dittus, United States of America v. Larry D. Wiegman Carla J. Wiegman Bruce W. Van Zee John C. Dean, Co-Executor of the Estate of Ray L. Thomas Wade Rubey, Co-Executor of the Estate of Ray L. Thomas Leon G. Wiegman Edna H. Wiegman Dwight A. Dittus
Accord United States v. Petty Motor Co., 767 F.2d 712, 715 (10th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1056 , 106 S.Ct. 1284 , 89 L.Ed.2d 591 (1986). 20 The sale in this case appears to be a hybrid between the classic judicial sale described in Weir, 339 F.2d at 85 , and an execution sale.
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re DeLuca
See, Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (contract is executory if performance is due to some extent on both sides). [19] Although § 365(a) refers only to a "trustee," under § 1107, Bankruptcy Code, a debtor in possession has all of the rights, powers, and duties of a trustee, except the right to compensation. [20] Under § 365(d)(2), Bankruptcy Code, such executory contracts may be assumed or rejected "at any time before the confirmation of the plan" unless the court, on moti…
discussed
Cited "see"
JTB Enterprises, L.C. v. D & B Venture, L.C. (In re DeLUCA)
See, Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (contract is executory if performance is due to some extent on both sides). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Broyhill v. DeLUCA (In re DeLUCA)
See, Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (contract is executory if performance is due to some extent on both sides). .
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re DeLuca
See, Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (contract is executory if performance is due to some extent on both sides). [19] Although § 365(a) refers only to a "trustee," under § 1107, Bankruptcy Code, a debtor in possession has all of the rights, powers, and duties of a trustee, except the right to compensation. [20] See, § 13.1-1021, Va.Code Ann ("Any estate or interest in property may be acquired in the name of the limited liability company, and title to any estate or …
discussed
Cited "see"
Dunes Hotel Associates v. Hyatt Corp. (In Re Dunes Hotel Associates)
See Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043, 1048 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986); In re Nexus Communications, Inc., 55 B.R. 596, 598 (Bankr.E.D.N.C.1985) (actions to assume or reject executory contracts under § 365 are *993 “core” proceedings); In re Texaco, Inc., 77 B.R. 433, 437 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.1987) (same).
cited
Cited "see"
Ramada Franchise Systems, Incorporated, Successor in Interest to Ramada, Incorporated, Formerly Known as Ramada Inns, Incorporated v. Dinesh Bhagat Rajni Bhagat, Ramada Franchise Systems, Incorporated, Successor in Interest to Ramada, Incorporated, Formerly Known as Ramada Inns, Incorporated v. R & D Investment Company, a North Carolina General Partnership, F/d/b/a Ramada Inn, D/B/A Days Inn
See Lubrizol Enterprises v. Richmond Metal Finishers Inc., 756 F.2d 1043, 1048 (4th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
Giddings Petroleum Corp. v. Peterson Food Mart, Inc.
See Lubrizol Enters. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043, 1045 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 -58, 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (technology licensing agreement was executory contract because party had obligation to protect license from interference); In re Sun Ray Bakery, Inc., 5 B.R. 670, 672 (Bankr.D.Mass.1980) (even though party had made full payment for exclusive bakery franchise, contract was executory when other contractual obligations were unperformed).
discussed
Cited "see"
Giddings Petroleum Corporation v. Peterson Food Mart, Inc. and Mutscher, Incorporated
See Lubrizol Enters. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc. , 756 F.2d 1043, 1045 (4th Cir. 1985), cert. denied , 475 U.S. 1057 -58 (1986) (technology licensing agreement was executory contract because party had obligation to protect license from interference); In re Sun Ray Bakery, Inc. , 5 B.R. 670, 672 (Bankr.
discussed
Cited "see"
Byrd v. South Florida Carpenters District Council
(2×)
See Davis v. United Automobile, Aerospace & Agriculture Implement Workers, 765 F.2d 1510 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1284 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Masterworks, Inc.
See Lubrizol Enter., Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc. (In re Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc.), 756 F.2d 1043, 1046 (4th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986); In re G-N Partners, 48 B.R. 462, 465 (Bankr.D.Minn.1985).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re Specialty Foods of Pittsburgh, Inc.
See generally Lubrizol Enterprises v. Richmond Metal Finishers, 756 F.2d 1043, 1045 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986).
discussed
Cited "see"
G.P. Reed v. United Transportation Union Fred A. Hardin K.R. Moore J.L. McKinney
(2×)
See Davis v. United Auto Workers, 765 F.2d 1510 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1284 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (following Steelworkers’ Local 1397 v. USWA, 748 F.2d 180 (3d Cir.1984)); Adkins v. IBEW, 769 F.2d 330 , 335 (6th Cir.1985) (following Local 1397); Vallone v. Local Union No. 705, Internat’l Brotherhood of Teamsters, 755 F.2d 520 (7th Cir.1984); Steelworkers’ Local 1397 v. USWA, 748 F.2d 180 (3d Cir.1984); Linder v. Berge, 739 F.2d 686 (1st Cir.1984) (concerning a Section 414 claim).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re Spoverlook, LLC
See also Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc. (In re Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc.), 756 F.2d 1043, 1046 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986); RAF Financial Corp. v. Resurgens Communications Group, Inc., 1990 WL 145603 , * 3 (D.Colo.1990); In re Simon Transp.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC
See In re Trans World Airlines, Inc. 261 B.R. 103, 121 (Bankr. *183 D.Del.2001); see also Lubrizol Enter., Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, 756 F.2d 1043, 1047 (4th Cir.1985) cert denied 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (same).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Safety-Kleen Corp.
See, e.g., Lubrizol Enters., Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc. (In re Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc.), 756 F.2d 1043, 1046 (4th Cir.1985), cert, denied 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (holding that a licensor’s contingent duty to defend infringement suits was a material obligation); In re Exide Techs., 340 B.R. 222, 234 (Bankr.D.Del.2006) (citing In re Richmond Metal).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Exide Technologies
See, e.g., Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc. (In re Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc.), 756 F.2d 1043, 1046 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (holding that the licensor’s contingent duty to defend infringement suits was a material obligation). 13 b.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Transcolor Corp. v. Cerberus Partners, L.P. (In Re Transcolor Corp.)
See also Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc. (In re Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc.), 756 F.2d 1043, 1048 (4th Cir.1985), *154 cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986); In re Nexus Communications, Inc., 55 B.R. 596, 598 (Bankr.E.D.N.C.1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Lamb
Nevertheless, “the rule in federal courts is well settled that the matter of confirming a judicial sale rests in the sound judicial discretion of the trial court and this discretion will not be disturbed on appeal except in cases of its abuse.” United States v. Heasley, 283 F.2d 422, 426 (8th Cir.1960); see Bovay v. Townsend, 78 F.2d 343, 345 (8th Cir.1935) (“The rule in federal courts is quite well settled, however, that the matter of confirming a public judicial sale rests in the sound judicial discretion of the trial court and that appellate courts will not disturb that discretion, ex…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Alabama Symphony Ass'n
See, e.g., Lubrizol Enter., Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986); In re Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc., 131 B.R. 808 (S.D.Ohio 1991); In re Taylor, 103 B.R. 511 (D.N.J.1989), aff'd in part, 913 F.2d 102 (3d Cir.1990).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Blackstone Potato Chip Co. v. Mr. Popper, Inc. (In Re Blackstone Potato Chip Co.)
See, e.g., Lubrizol Enterprises v. Richmond Metal Finishers, 756 F.2d 1043 (4th Cir.1985), cert. denied, Lubrizol v. Canfield, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1985); In re Chi-Feng Huang, 23 B.R. 798 (BAP 9th Cir.1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sharon Steel Corporation v. National Fuel Gas Distribution Corporation, Intervenor: James W. Toren, Trustee
See, e.g., Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043, 1045 (4th Cir.1985) (relying on Countryman’s definition), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986); see also N.L.R.B. v. Bildisco & Bildisco, 465 U.S. 513 , 522 n. 6, 104 S.Ct. 1188 , 1194 n. 6, 79 L.Ed.2d 482 (1984) (although Bankruptcy Code provides no definition of executory contract, legislative history of § 365(a) defines the term to mean a contract on which performance remains due on both sides); In re KMMCO, Inc., 40 B.R. 976, 978 (E.D.Mich.1984) (executory contracts ar…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Camp v. National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh (In Re Government Securities Corp.)
See, e.g., Lubrizol Enters., Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., 756 F.2d 1043 (Bankr. 4th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1285 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (holding that technology licensing agreement was an executory contract where the debtor owed the non-bankrupt continuing duties, inter alia, to notify of patent infringement suits and other uses of or licensing of a certain process and the non-bankrupt owed the debtor reciprocal duties of accounting for and paying royalties for use of the process); In re Sun City Investments, 89 B.R. 245 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1988) (holding that…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rollin Lewis v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Local Union No. 771 and Kenneth C. Laukhuff
(2×)
See also Davis v. United Automobile Workers of America, 765 F.2d 1510 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 475 U.S. 1057 , 106 S.Ct. 1284 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986) (applying section 10(b) limitations period to LMRDA claim); but see Doty v. Sewall, 784 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.1986) (holding section 10(b) inapplicable to LMRDA claim brought by union activist against two local unions).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Merk v. JEWEL FOOD STORES DIV., JEWEL COMPANIES
See, e.g., Davis v. Auto Workers, 765 F.2d 1510 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 1284 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986); Vallone v. Teamsters Local No. 705, 755 F.2d 520, 521-22 (7th Cir.1985); Local Union 1397 v. Steelworkers, 748 F.2d 180, 182-84 (3d Cir.1984); but see Doty v. Sewall, 784 F.2d 1, 3-10 (1st Cir.1986); Rodonich v. House Wreckers, 624 F.Supp. 678, 681-93 (S.D.N.Y.1985); Testa v. Gallagher, 621 F.Supp. 476, 477-78 (S.D.N.Y.1985).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Merk v. Jewel Food Stores Div.
See, e.g., Davis v. Auto Workers, 765 F.2d 1510 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 106 S.Ct. 1284 , 89 L.Ed.2d 592 (1986); Vallone v. Teamsters Local No. 705, 755 F.2d 520, 521-22 (7th Cir.1985); Local Union 1397 v. Steelworkers, 748 F.2d 180, 182-84 (3d Cir.1984); but see Doty v. Sewall, 784 F.2d 1, 3-10 (1st Cir.1986); Rodonich v. House Wreckers, 624 F.Supp. 678, 681-93 (S.D.N.Y.1985); Testa v. Gallagher, 621 F.Supp. 476, 477-78 (S.D.N.Y.1985).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Davis
v.
United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America
v.
United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America
No. 85-844.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 3, 1986.
Lead Opinion
C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Dissent
Justice White,
dissenting.
The question presented is what statute of limitations to borrow in this suit against a union for an alleged violation of a former member’s rights under §101 of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U. S. C. § 411. The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that in light of DelCostello v. Teamsters, 462 U. S. 151 (1983), the appropriate source from which to borrow a limitations period is not state law but § 10(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U. S. C. § 160(b). 765 F. 2d 1510 (1985). Although not without support in other Circuits, see, e. g., Local Union 1397 v. United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, 748 F. 2d 180 (CA3 1984), the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in this case conflicts with Doty v. Sewall, 784 F. 2d 1 (CA1 1986). Doty explicitly rejects the analysis of this case and Local Union 1397, supra, and holds that the usual practice of borrowing statutes of limitations from state law should be followed in a suit like this one. I would grant certiorari to resolve this conflict.