Hutson v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. (In re National Gas Distributors, LLC)
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
556 F.3d 247 (2009)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company, Smithfield Packing Company, and Stadler’s Country Hams, Inc. (collectively, the purchasers) (defendants) contracted with National Gas Distributors, LLC (National Gas) (debtor) to purchase natural gas. The gas-supply contracts allowed the purchasers to hedge against fluctuating natural-gas prices by fixing the price of future gas deliveries for a period of months and requiring National Gas to either supply gas at the agreed price regardless of the actual market price or pay the purchasers the difference between the agreed price and the market price. National Gas subsequently filed for bankruptcy, and trustee Richard Hutson (plaintiff) filed adversary complaints against the purchasers, seeking to avoid the gas-supply contracts. Hutson argued that the contracts were fraudulent conveyances because they were made for less than market value and made when National Gas was insolvent. The purchasers moved to dismiss, arguing that their gas-supply contracts were commodity forward agreements that were exempted from avoidance as swap agreements under 11 U.S.C. § 546(g). The bankruptcy court denied the motions to dismiss. The court said that commodity forward agreements must be tied to trading in financial markets, rather than directly negotiated, and could not involve physical delivery of the commodity to the end user. Under that definition, the gas-supply contracts were not commodity forward agreements because they were directly negotiated and involved the physical delivery of gas to the purchasers. The purchasers appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Niemeyer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.