In re Lunan Family Restaurants Limited Partnership

192 B.R. 173 (1996)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Lunan Family Restaurants Limited Partnership

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois
192 B.R. 173 (1996)

Facts

Lunan Family Restaurants Limited Partnership (Lunan) (debtor) borrowed $13.5 million from Bank of America Illinois (the bank) to purchase 31 restaurants that Lunan planned to convert into Shoney’s franchise restaurants. Lunan purchased some restaurants in fee simple and leased other restaurants from Marriott. Lunan’s loan from the bank was secured by mortgages on the fee-simple properties, leasehold mortgages on the leased properties, and a security interest in Lunan’s equipment and accounts receivable. The Shoney’s restaurants were not successful, and Lunan defaulted on the loan and many of its leases. The bank did not foreclose on any of the properties and instead wanted Lunan to sell the restaurants as going concerns (i.e., as operational businesses) so the proceeds could be used to satisfy Lunan’s debt. The bank met with Lunan about filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and Lunan filed a Chapter 11 petition. Lunan presented reorganization plans to the bank, but the bank rejected any plan that would involve a long-term payback of the debt. Lunan meanwhile continued to operate its businesses and manage its properties as a debtor-in-possession. Lunan eventually sold 19 restaurants as going concerns, stopped operating three restaurants, and continued to actively market all but one of the remaining restaurants for sale. The bank supported Lunan’s operations and liquidation efforts and repeatedly allowed Lunan to use the bank’s cash collateral. However, the bank never explicitly consented to specific services or payment for those services out of the bank’s collateral. In total, the restaurant sales generated $11 million, of which the bank received over $8.2 million. In continuing to operate the restaurants, Lunan had incurred costs and expenses including (1) utilities bills; (2) wage-related expenses including payroll, payroll taxes, and health-insurance benefits; (3) fees for accounting services; and (4) debtor-in-possession expenses including maintenance of Lunan’s office and expenses related to keeping open the one restaurant that Lunan was not trying to sell. Lunan sought reimbursement of those expenses through a surcharge on the bank’s distribution from the bankruptcy estate pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 506(c).

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Schmetterer, 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 802,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 802,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 802,000 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
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 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