In re Commercial Envelope Manufacturing Co.
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York
3 Bankr. Ct. Dec. 647 (1977)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
Four interrelated corporations (the debtor corporations) (debtors) that shared common ownership filed for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. The debtor corporations moved to substantively consolidate their assets and liabilities, arguing that such consolidation was necessary to create a reorganization plan. The debtor companies presented testimony from an accountant who explained that the accounting of the debtor corporations was done together, meaning there was no separate accounting for the assets and liabilities of each company. The debtor corporations had also guaranteed loans made to each other, further entangling their finances. The accountant stated that an audit to untangle the assets and liabilities of the debtor corporations, if even possible, would be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming, and that substantively consolidating the assets and liabilities of the debtor corporations would be beneficial to their creditors. Two creditors of the debtor corporations (the objecting creditors) (creditors) objected to the substantive consolidation but presented no evidence that the consolidation would disadvantage them.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Babitt, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 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.