In re Le Café Creme, Ltd., Debtor

244 B.R. 221 (2000)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Le Café Creme, Ltd., Debtor

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York
244 B.R. 221 (2000)

  • Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD

Facts

Xavier and Danielle LeRoux and Denis and Celestine Peron (creditors) opened restaurant Le Café Creme, Ltd. (debtor) on January 1, 1991. The LeRouxs and Perons were the restaurant’s only shareholders, officers, and directors. The restaurant struggled from the outset and routinely bounced checks to suppliers. Over time, each couple loaned the restaurant more than $200,000. In February 1994, the LeRouxs sold their stock back to the restaurant, leaving the Perons sole owners. The parties entered a purchase agreement that essentially converted the LeRouxs’ debt into equity. The restaurant had partially repaid the LeRouxs but still owed them about $95,000. The restaurant agreed to pay the LeRouxs $200,000—about $95,000 to pay off the loan and $105,000 to purchase their stock. Funding came from restaurant revenues and additional loans from the Perons. The restaurant executed a promissory note for $150,000 and a security agreement giving the LeRouxs a security interest and a lien on the restaurant’s physical assets. In October 1997, the restaurant filed voluntarily for reorganization in bankruptcy, and the court ordered it sold to an outside buyer. Meanwhile, the restaurant had paid the LeRouxs only $135,671 of the $200,000 buyout price, so the LeRouxs filed a secured claim in the bankruptcy for the remaining $60,836. The restaurant moved to equitably subordinate the LeRouxs’ claim, alleging they engaged in conduct unfair to other creditors when they knew the restaurant could not pay its bills. Peron testified that when the restaurant bought out the LeRouxs, it had insufficient cash to operate and minimal assets. Finally, the restaurant’s expert witness testified that its liabilities outpaced its assets from 1991 to 1996 such that it faced deepening insolvency.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Brozman, C.J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership