In re Dynaco Corp.
United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Hampshire
162 B.R. 389 (1993)
- Written by Philip Glass, JD
Facts
Dynaco Corp. (Dynaco) (debtor), a manufacturer of circuit boards from raw materials with an Arizona facility, filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy on July 23, 1993. On October 1, 1993, Dynaco filed a motion for continued use of cash collateral. State Street Bank & Trust Company (State Street Bank) (creditor), a secured creditor possessing a claim on the cash collateral at issue, filed an objection to Dynaco’s motion. Before the bankruptcy court, Dynaco presented evidence that it would meet its projected estimate of $15 million in sales by the end of fiscal year 1994, or September 30, 1994. This evidence included attestations that Dynaco would grow its customer base, obtain amounts owed by customers, and apply business-management strategies proposed by a professional management group to increase the productivity and orderliness of its business. Dynaco showed that it would not require monetary assistance besides access to the cash collateral, and additionally demonstrated the existence of a 17 percent equity cushion capable of preventing a decrease in the collateral’s value. State Street Bank, which would benefit from the equity cushion, failed to proffer evidence rebutting any of Dynaco’s claims.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Yacos, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.