DOCSLIB.ORG

PIPELINE FOODS, LLC, Et Al.,1 Debtors

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PIPELINE FOODS, LLC, Et Al.,1 Debtors Case 21-11002-KBO Doc 289 Filed 08/13/21 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) In re: ) Chapter 11 ) PIPELINE FOODS, LLC, et al.,1 ) Case No. 21-11002 (KBO) ) Debtors. ) Jointly Administered ) ) Hearing Date: August 20, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. (ET) (Requested) ) Objection Deadline: August 19, 2021 at 12:00 p.m. ) (ET) (Requested) MOTION OF THE DEBTORS FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER AUTHORIZING THE REJECTION OF CONTRACT WITH CERES CONSULTING LLC Pipeline Foods, LLC (“Pipeline Foods”) and its affiliated debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, the “Debtors”) in the above-captioned chapter 11 cases (the “Chapter 11 Cases”), by and through their undersigned counsel, file this motion (the “Motion”) for entry of an order, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A (the “Proposed Order”), pursuant to section 365(a) of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”), authorizing the Debtors to reject that certain shipping contract between the Debtors and Ceres Consulting L.L.C. (“Ceres”) dated May 21, 2021, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B (the “Rejected Shipping Contract”), effective as of the date of this Motion (the “Rejection Effective Date”). In support of this Motion, the Debtors respectfully state as follows: 1 The Debtors in these cases, along with the last four digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, are: Pipeline Foods, LLC (5070); Pipeline Holdings, LLC (5754); Pipeline Foods Real Estate Holding Company, LLC (7057); Pipeline Foods, ULC (3762); Pipeline Foods Southern Cone S.R.L. (5978); and Pipeline Foods II, LLC (9653). The Debtors’ mailing address is 6499 University Avenue NE, Suite 200, Fridley, MN 55432. 38812486.3 Case 21-11002-KBO Doc 289 Filed 08/13/21 Page 2 of 9 Jurisdiction and Venue 1. The Court has jurisdiction to consider this Motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334, and the Amended Standing Order of Reference from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, dated February 29, 2012. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b). 2. Pursuant to Rule 9013–1(f) of the Local Rules of Bankruptcy Practice and Procedure of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Local Rules”), the Debtors consent to the entry of a final order by the Court in connection with this matter to the extent that it is later determined that the Court, absent consent of the parties, cannot enter final orders or judgments consistent with Article III of the United States Constitution. 3. Venue is proper before the Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. 4. The statutory basis for the relief requested herein is section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and Rule 6006 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the “Bankruptcy Rules”). Background 5. On July 8, 2021 and July 12, 2021 (together, the “Petition Date”), each of the Debtors filed a voluntary petition with this Court for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Debtors continue to operate their businesses and manage their properties as debtors in possession pursuant to sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No request for the appointment of a trustee or examiner has been made in the Chapter 11 Cases. On July 22, 2021, the Office of the United States Trustee appointed the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Pipeline Foods, LLC, et al. (the “Committee”). -2- 38812486.3 Case 21-11002-KBO Doc 289 Filed 08/13/21 Page 3 of 9 6. The reasons for the Debtors’ commencing the Chapter 11 Cases and information relating to the Debtors’ business operations are set forth in the Omnibus Declaration of Winston Mar in Support of Debtors’ Initial Emergency First Day Motions and Related Relief [Docket No. 6]. A. The Rejected Shipping Contract 7. Pipeline Foods and Ceres are parties to the Rejected Shipping Contract, which is a shipping contract for the use of barges to deliver organic soybeans. Pursuant to the Rejected Shipping Contract, during the period June 10, 2021 through August 5, 2021, Ceres was obligated to provide and operate ten (10) barges (each a “Barge” and collectively, the “Barges”) to ship organic soybeans from Houston, Texas to Simmons Feed & Supply LLC d/b/a Simmons Grain Co. (“Simmons Grain”) in Wellsville, Ohio. 8. Prior to the Petition Date, Pipeline Foods and Ceres arranged for one (1) Barge containing organic soybeans to be loaded and shipped to Simmons Grain in Wellsville, Ohio. Thereafter, subsequent to the Petition Date, Pipeline Foods and Ceres arranged for a second Barge containing organic soybeans to be loaded and shipped to Simmons Grain in Wellsville, Ohio. Pipeline Foods has not made arrangements with Ceres for the remaining eight (8) Barges (collectively, the “Remaining Barges”) under the Rejected Shipping Contract. B. The Simmons Grain Settlement and the Lack of Need for the Remaining Barges 9. Contemporaneously herewith, the Debtors have filed a motion for approval of a settlement between the Debtors, Simmons Grain, Coöperatieve Rabobank U.A., New York Branch (“Rabobank”), Compeer Financial, PCA and Compeer Financial FLCA (the “9019 Motion”), pursuant to which, inter alia, Pipeline Foods will make the Simmons Grain Identified Soybeans (as defined in the 9019 Motion) located in Houston, Texas available for Simmons -3- 38812486.3 Case 21-11002-KBO Doc 289 Filed 08/13/21 Page 4 of 9 Grain, and Simmons Grain shall coordinate and pay for the transport of such goods. Accordingly, the Debtors no longer have any need for the Remaining Barges. 10. Because the Debtors no longer require the use of such Remaining Barges, the Debtors believe that prompt rejection of the Rejected Shipping Contract is necessary. If the Rejected Shipping Contract is not promptly rejected, the Debtors may incur unnecessary costs or accumulate damages that may be asserted as administrative claims by Ceres. 11. The Debtors and Ceres have engaged in discussions related to the Rejected Shipping Contract and the Debtors have been informed by Ceres that Ceres wishes to enter into new contracts with other third parties for the use of the Remaining Barges. Accordingly, the Debtors and Ceres have agreed to reject the Rejected Shipping Contract as of the Rejection Effective Date to, among other things, relieve Ceres of its obligations under the Rejected Shipping Contract. 12. In light of the circumstances described herein, the Debtors believe that prompt rejection of the Rejected Shipping Contract as of the Rejection Effective Date is necessary and in the best interests of the Debtors and their estates and creditors. Relief Requested 13. By this Motion, the Debtors seek the entry of an order, pursuant to section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, authorizing the Debtors to reject the Rejected Shipping Contract, effective as of the Rejection Effective Date, and granting such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. -4- 38812486.3 Case 21-11002-KBO Doc 289 Filed 08/13/21 Page 5 of 9 Basis for Relief Requested A. Rejection of the Rejected Shipping Contract Reflects the Debtors’ Sound Business Judgment. 14. Section 365(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a debtor in possession, “subject to the court’s approval, may assume or reject any executory contract or unexpired lease.” 11 U.S.C. § 365(a). A debtor’s decision to reject an executory contract under section 365 is governed by the business judgment standard. E.g., In re HQ Global Holdings, Inc., 290 B.R. 507, 511 (Bankr. D. Del. 2003) (citing Group of Instit. Investors v. Chi., Milwaukee, St. Paul. & Pac. R.R. Co., 318 U.S. 523, 550 (1943)); Computer Sales Int’l Inc. v. Fed. Mogul (In re Fed. Mogul Global, Inc.), 293 B.R. 124, 126 (D. Del. 2003). “Under the business judgment standard, the sole issue is whether the rejection benefits the estate.” In re HQ Global Holdings, Inc., 290 B.R. at 511; NLRB v. Bildisco & Bildisco (In re Bildisco), 682 F.2d 72, 29 (3d Cir. 1982) (stating that the “usual test for rejection of an executory contract is simply whether rejection would benefit the estate”); see also Univ. Med. Ctr. v. Sullivan (In re Univ. Med. Ctr.), 973 F.2d 1065, 1075 (3d Cir. 1992) (explaining that section 365 is “designed to ‘allow[] the trustee or debtor in possession a reasonable time within which to determine whether adoption or rejection of the executory contract would be beneficial to an effective reorganization” (citing Data-Link Sys. Inc. v. Whitcomb & Keller Mortgage Co. (In re Whitcomb & Keller Mortgage Co., Inc.), 715 F.2d 375, 379 (7th Cir. 1983))). Furthermore, a “debtor’s determination to reject an executory contract can only be overturned if the decision was the product of bad faith, whim or caprice.” In re HQ Global Holdings, Inc., 290 B.R. at 511 (citing In re Trans World Airlines, Inc., 261 B.R. 103, 121 (Bankr. D. Del. 2001)). 15. As described above, the Debtors have determined, in their business judgment, that there is no benefit to maintaining the Rejected Shipping Contract since it obligates the Debtors to -5- 38812486.3 Case 21-11002-KBO Doc 289 Filed 08/13/21 Page 6 of 9 use the Remaining Barges, which they no longer need. The rejection of the Rejected Shipping Contract will relieve the Debtors from any this obligation and the costs associated with such obligation. 16. Additionally, the Debtors have been advised by Ceres that Ceres wishes to contract with other third parties for the use of the Remaining Barges.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Building Blocks
    The Essential Resource for Today’s Busy Insolvency Professional Building Blocks BY LISA LAUKITIS AND EDWARD P. MAHANEY-WALTER1 Precedent in Bankruptcy Cases lthough all lawyers use precedent, few have are precedential: “parts ... that focus on the legal considered its nature and effect closely. To questions actually presented ... and decided ... the Ahelp, in 2016, Bryan Garner, editor-in-chief ‘court’s determination of a matter of law pivotal to of Black’s Law Dictionary, published, for a general- its decision.’” Everything else is “dicta” and not ist legal audience, The Law of Judicial Precedent. binding law. With limited exceptions, precedent is He had 12 appellate judges as co-authors, includ- either strictly binding — obliging judges to follow ing now-Supreme Court Justices Neil Gorsuch and it even when they disagree — or not binding, but Brett Kavanaugh.2 It is the first hornbook on prece- instead persuasive.6 dent since 1912.3 According to Garner, “This tricky If a logical predicate of a holding is not explicit Lisa Laukitis subject is dealt with to a degree, but not thoroughly, but was clearly briefed, it can be an “implicit hold- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP in legal-methods courses, and then it’s discussed ing” that has precedential force, but generally a New York occasionally throughout law school. But it’s such court’s assumptions — accurate or not — are not an important subject that it needs a full, system- precedent: “[P]recedent is limited to the points of atic treatment. That was the inspiration — because law raised by the record, considered by the court, writings about it are often exceedingly narrow, and and determined by the outcome.” Issues not consid- they’re scattered among the law reviews.”4 ered by the court do not create precedent.
    [Show full text]
  • PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN Volume 29 Number 9 Saturday, February 27, 1999 • Harrisburg, Pa
    PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN Volume 29 Number 9 Saturday, February 27, 1999 • Harrisburg, Pa. Pages 1059—1204 Agencies in this issue: The Courts Delaware River Basin Commission Department of Banking Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Department of Education Department of Environmental Protection Department of General Services Department of Health Department of Revenue Department of Transportation Environmental Hearing Board Fish and Boat Commission Game Commission Health Care Cost Containment Council Independent Regulatory Review Commission Insurance Department Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission State Board of Pharmacy Treasury Department Turnpike Commission Detailed list of contents appears inside. PRINTED ON 100% RECYCLED PAPER Latest Pennsylvania Code Reporter (Master Transmittal Sheet): No. 291, February 1999 published weekly by Fry Communications, Inc. for the PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Legislative Reference Bu- reau, 647 Main Capitol Building, State & Third Streets, (ISSN 0162-2137) Harrisburg, Pa. 17120, under the policy supervision and direction of the Joint Committee on Documents pursuant to Part II of Title 45 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes (relating to publication and effectiveness of Com- monwealth Documents). Subscription rate $82.00 per year, postpaid to points in the United States. Individual copies $2.50. Checks for subscriptions and individual copies should be made payable to ‘‘Fry Communications, Inc.’’ Postmaster send address changes to: Periodicals postage paid at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Orders for subscriptions and other circulation matters FRY COMMUNICATIONS should be sent to: Attn: Pennsylvania Bulletin 800 W. Church Rd. Fry Communications, Inc. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055-3198 Attn: Pennsylvania Bulletin (717) 766-0211 ext. 340 800 W. Church Rd. (800) 334-1429 ext. 340 (toll free, out-of-State) Mechanicsburg, PA 17055-3198 (800) 524-3232 ext.
    [Show full text]
  • May 2016 | Share This on 1
    May 2016 | Share this on 1 Why The Fundamentals Are No Longer Good Enough One-Trick Ponies, Groupon Effect, Experience Optimization, and Customer Advocacy Behavior Michael Lowenstein, Thought Leadership Principal, Beyond Philosophy May 2016 | Share this on 2 The Challenge of Being a One-Trick Pony About thirty years ago, Paul Simon wrote a song entitled “One-Trick Pony”. The song describes a performing pony that has learned only one trick, and he succeeds or fails with the audience based on how well he executes it. As Simon conveys in the lyrics: “He’s got one trick to last a lifetime. It’s the principal source of his revenue.” This song, and its message, are something of a metaphor for what challenges many companies endeavoring to create customer advocacy behavior and relationships, leading to more frequent purchase activity, through customer experience and loyalty programs. A key reason companies have a difficult time achieving optimum customer loyalty is that the fail to provide full value fundamentals. They focus on satisfying customers exclusively through basic rational and functional benefits, which is often too benign and passive an approach to create strategic perceived value. Mostly, they emphasize single element or minimal element tactical approaches with customers, such as pricing, merchandise, loyalty cards, or points-based programs, without determining (either before programs are launched or after they are up and running) whether this is sufficient motivation for building a long-term relationship. Smart marketers know that, for instance, being a low-cost provider can be a trap and that only overall perceived value will prevail.
    [Show full text]
  • EXTENSIONS of REMARKS April 30, 1986 EXTENSIONS of REMARKS SANDINISTAS DENY RELIGIOUS Miguel Obando Y Bravo
    9148 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS April 30, 1986 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS SANDINISTAS DENY RELIGIOUS Miguel Obando y Bravo ... You may be The government supports a front-organi­ FREEDOM TO THE NICARA­ sure that these attacks are an offense zation "Peoples Church" that actively pro­ GUAN PEOPLE AND PERSE­ against the Christian sentiments of the motes Marxism-Leninism. The "Peoples CUTE ROMAN CATHOLICS IN great majority of the Nicaraguan people Church" blasphemous symbol is a crucified Christ imposed on a Sandinista guerrilla NICARAGUA Since that letter was written, the situation waving a Soviet AK-47 rifle. The "Peoples has gotten even worse. Church" is largely ignored by Nicaraguan HON. JACK F. KEMP The Sandinistas' most intense anti-Catho­ Catholics, and has minuscule support from OF NEW YORK lic efforts have been directed against the the clergy. Of the approximately 880 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Church's leaders. The regime's goal has priests, nuns, and monks in the country, been to undercut popular support for the fewer than 40 are loyal to this "Church," Wednesday, April 30, 1986 Catholic bishops through vicious propagan­ and of those 40, all but 10 are foreign mis­ Mr. KEMP. Mr. Speaker, recently 22 of our da portraying them as "counterrevolution­ sionaries. colleagues, led by Congressman HENRY aries" and "enemies of the people." Cardi­ Despite this grim record, the Sandinista nal Obando has been labelled as the "anti­ regime has waged a successful disinforma­ HYDE, circulated a "Dear Colleague" letter Christ" and accused of "collaborating" with tion campaign that has convinced many calling the attention of the Members to the ac­ the Somoza government-of which he was a American Catholic bishops, the United tions of the Marxist-Leninist Sandinista regime harsh critic.
    [Show full text]
  • 82 Dos 98 State of New York Department of State Office
    82 DOS 98 STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS ----------------------------------------X In the Matter of the Application of WILLIAM LA SHOMB DECISION For a License as a Private Investigator ----------------------------------------X The above noted matter came on for hearing before the under- signed, Roger Schneier, on March 3, 1998 at the office of the Department of State located at 41 State Street, Albany, New York. The applicant, of 111 Willard Road, Massena, New York 13662, having been advised of his right to be represented by attorney, chose to represent himself. The Division of Licensing Services (hereinafter "DLS") was represented by Supervising License Investigator Richard G. Drew. ISSUE The issue before the tribunal is whether the applicant has sufficient experience to qualify for a license as a private investigator. FINDINGS OF FACT 1) By application received by DLS on July 28, 1997 the applicant applied for a license as a private investigator (State's Ex. 2). 2) By letter dated July 30, 1997 DLS advised the applicant that it was conducting an investigation of his application, and that he was required to submit documentation regarding his claimed experi- ence with the Massena Village Police (State's Ex. 3). 3) By letter dated September 3, 1997, after having considered materials submitted by the applicant in response to its letter of July 30, 1997, DLS advised the applicant that it proposed to deny his application because he had failed to satisfactorily prove three years of qualifying experience in a primarily investigative position, and that he could request an administrative review.
    [Show full text]
  • Providername Locationname Physicaladdress1 Physicaladdress2 Physicalcity Zip Beds Region a Shining Light, Inc
    ProviderName LocationName PhysicalAddress1 PhysicalAddress2 PhysicalCity Zip Beds Region A Shining Light, Inc. A.J.'s Place 4321 Bonsack Road Roanoke 24012 4 Southwest A Shining Light, Inc. Jean's Place 175 Barbara Lane Roanoke 24019 4 Southwest A Shining Light, Inc. UR Home 238 Mountain Pass Road Blue Ridge 24064 3 Western AA & G Group Home AA & G Group Home, JA2 Place 2211 Richmond Avenue Portsmouth 23704 4 Eastern AC Support Systems Deer Lake 780 Deer Lake Drive Virginia Beach 23462 4 Eastern AC Support Systems Glen Lake 4412 Glen Lake Path Virginia Beach 23462 4 Eastern AC Support Systems Office 3420 Plum Crescent Virginia Beach 23453 4 Eastern Acclaim Care, Inc. Hollins Glen 9423 Hollins Glen Ct. Richmond 23228 4 Central Acclaim Care, Inc. Agra House 2404 Agra Drive Richmond 23228 4 Central Acclaim Care, Inc. Long Leaf House 4404 Long Leaf Drive Richmond 23297 4 Central Acclaim Care, Inc. Purcell House 9708 Purcell Road Richmond 23228 4 Central AdvoServ of Virginia (DBA) Bellwether Aston 3410 Aston St. Annandale 22003 4 Northern Behavioral Health AdvoServ of Virginia (DBA) Bellwether Athens 9401 Athens Rd. Fairfax 22032 4 Northern Behavioral Health AdvoServ of Virginia (DBA) Bellwether Braddock Road Group Home 1 10055A Braddock Road Fairfax 22031 4 Northern Behavioral Health AdvoServ of Virginia (DBA) Bellwether Braddock Road Group Home 2 10055B Braddock Road Fairfax 22031 4 Northern Behavioral Health AdvoServ of Virginia (DBA) Bellwether Braddock Road Group Home 3 10075A Braddock Road Fairfax 22031 4 Northern Behavioral Health AdvoServ of Virginia (DBA) Bellwether Braddock Road Group Home 4 10075B Braddock Road Fairfax 22031 4 Northern Behavioral Health AdvoServ of Virginia (DBA) Bellwether Lamarre 4200 Lamarre Fairfax 22030 4 Northern Behavioral Health AdvoServ of Virginia (DBA) Bellwether Ravensworth 5209 Ravensworth Rd.
    [Show full text]
  • MADE in AMERICA MY STORY by SAM WALTON
    SAM WALTON: MADE IN AMERICA MY STORY by SAM WALTON with JOHN HUEY BANTAM BOOKS NEW YORK • TORONTO • LONDON • SYDNEY • AUCKLAND This edition contains the complete text of the original hardcover edition. NOT ONE WORD HAS BEEN OMITTED. SAM WALTON: MADE IN AMERICA A Bantam Book/published by arrangement with Doubleday PUBLISHING HISTORY Doubleday edition published June 1992 Bantam edition/June 1993 Photographs without credits appear courtesy of the Walton family. All rights reserved. Copyright © 1992 by the Estate of Samuel Moore Walton. Cover photo copyright © 1989 by Louis Psihoyos/Matrix. Cover design by Emily & Maura Design. Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 92-18874. ISBN 0-553-56283-5 Published simultaneously in the United States and Canada Bantam Books are published by Bantam Books, a division of Bantam Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc. Its trademark, consisting of the words "Bantam Books" and the portrayal of a rooster, is Registered in U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and in other countries. Marca Registrada. Bantam Books, 1540 Broadway, New York, New York 10036. PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OPM 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 CONTENTS Acknowledgments Foreword 1 Learning to Value a Dollar 2 Starting on a Dime 3 Bouncing Back 4 Swimming Upstream 5 Raising a Family 6 Recruiting the Team 7 Taking the Company Public 8 Rolling Out the Formula 9 Building the Partnership 10 Stepping Back 11 Creating a Culture 12 Making the Customer Number One 13 Meeting the Competition 14 Expanding the Circles 15 Thinking Small 16 Giving Something Back 17 Running a Successful Company: Ten Rules That Worked for Me 18 Wanting to Leave a Legacy A Postscript Co-Author's Note ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Life has been great to me, probably better than any man has a right to expect.
    [Show full text]
  • Equal Protection - Pennsylvania's Sunday Trading Laws Violate the Equal Protection Provision of Pennsylvania's Constitution
    Volume 24 Issue 5 Article 5 1979 Constitutional Law - Pennsylvania Constitution - Equal Protection - Pennsylvania's Sunday Trading Laws Violate the Equal Protection Provision of Pennsylvania's Constitution Stanley A. Smith Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation Stanley A. Smith, Constitutional Law - Pennsylvania Constitution - Equal Protection - Pennsylvania's Sunday Trading Laws Violate the Equal Protection Provision of Pennsylvania's Constitution, 24 Vill. L. Rev. 992 (1979). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol24/iss5/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Villanova Law Review by an authorized editor of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. Smith: Constitutional Law - Pennsylvania Constitution - Equal Protection Recent Developments CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- PENNSYLVANIA CONSTITUTION- EQUAL PROTECTION-PENNSYLVANIA'S SUNDAY TRADING LAWS VIOLATE THE EQUAL PROTECTION PROVISION OF PENNSYLVANIA'S CONSTITUTION. Kroger Co. v. O'Hara Township (Pa. 1978) O'Hara and McCandless Townships initiated formal prosecutions against appellants, Kroger Company and Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc.,' for opening their grocery stores for business on Sunday in violation of Pennsylvania's Sunday Trading Laws (Blue Laws). 2 The store owners coun- tered this action by petitioning the court of common pleas to enjoin the townships from enforcing the Blue Laws, claiming that the Laws were selec- 1. Kroger Co. v. O'Hara Township, 481 Pa. 101, 104, 392 A.2d 266, 267 (1978).
    [Show full text]
  • PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN Volume 28 Number 48 Saturday, November 28, 1998 • Harrisburg, Pa
    PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN Volume 28 Number 48 Saturday, November 28, 1998 • Harrisburg, Pa. Pages 5837—5854 Agencies in this issue: The General Assembly The Courts Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs Department of Banking Department of Environmental Protection Department of General Services Department of Health Department of Labor and Industry Department of Revenue Department of Transportation Independent Regulatory Review Commission Insurance Department Liquor Control Board Medical Professional Liability Catastrophe Loss Fund Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission State Board of Auctioneer Examiners State Board of Veterinary Medicine State Ethics Commission State Police Turnpike Commission Detailed list of contents appears inside. PRINTED ON 100% RECYCLED PAPER Latest Pennsylvania Code Reporter (Master Transmittal Sheet): No. 288, November 1998 published weekly by Fry Communications, Inc. for the PENNSYLVANIA BULLETIN Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Legislative Reference Bu- reau, 647 Main Capitol Building, State & Third Streets, (ISSN 0162-2137) Harrisburg, Pa. 17120, under the policy supervision and direction of the Joint Committee on Documents pursuant to Part II of Title 45 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes (relating to publication and effectiveness of Com- monwealth Documents). Subscription rate $82.00 per year, postpaid to points in the United States. Individual copies $2.50. Checks for subscriptions and individual copies should be made payable to ‘‘Fry Communications, Inc.’’ Postmaster send address changes to: Periodicals postage paid at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Orders for subscriptions and other circulation matters FRY COMMUNICATIONS should be sent to: Attn: Pennsylvania Bulletin 800 W. Church Rd. Fry Communications, Inc. Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania 17055-3198 Attn: Pennsylvania Bulletin (717) 766-0211 ext. 340 800 W. Church Rd. (800) 334-1429 ext.
    [Show full text]
  • The Failure of Public Company Bankruptcies in Delaware and New York: Empirical Evidence of a "Race to the Bottom"
    Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 54 Issue 2 Issue 2 - March 2001 Article 1 3-2001 The Failure of Public Company Bankruptcies in Delaware and New York: Empirical Evidence of a "Race to the Bottom" Lynn M. LoPucki Sara D. Kalin Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Bankruptcy Law Commons Recommended Citation Lynn M. LoPucki and Sara D. Kalin, The Failure of Public Company Bankruptcies in Delaware and New York: Empirical Evidence of a "Race to the Bottom", 54 Vanderbilt Law Review 231 (2001) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol54/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Failure of Public Company Bankruptcies in Delaware and New York: Empirical Evidence of a "Race to the Bottom" Lynn M. LoPucki SaraD. Kalin INTRODUCTION ....................... *......................................... 232 I. METHODOLOGY .................................................................. 237 A. The Companies Studied .......................................... 237 B. Calculationof the Refiling Rate .............................. 238 C. Conditions of Comparability................................... 239 D. Calculationof the Background Rate ....................... 241 E. Data Sources and Collection Procedures................. 243 II. FINDINGS ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Get Doc > Do You Know Who I Am? (Paperback)
    HYSB52LNBRLA » PDF » Do You Know Who I Am? (Paperback) Download Kindle DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM? (PAPERBACK) Createspace, United States, 2012. Paperback. Condition: New. Language: English . Brand New Book ***** Print on Demand *****.This is an Autobiography of my life starting with my growing up years in the Bronx. Learn about the details of my career that led to my involvement with the start of many of the USA s leading Discount Stores such as Walmart, Kmart, Target, Woolco, Arlan s, Zayres, Zodys, Jefferson Stores, Ames, Caldor, Mammouth Mart, Jamesway, Bradlees, Ayrway, Ann Hope, Hills, White... Read PDF Do You Know Who I Am? (Paperback) Authored by Seymour Cohen Released at 2012 Filesize: 9.29 MB Reviews This pdf is so gripping and fascinating. It really is rally intriguing throgh looking at period of time. I am pleased to tell you that this is basically the very best publication we have go through within my personal lifestyle and might be he very best ebook for ever. -- Eleonore Muller DVM It in one of my personal favorite book. Sure, it is engage in, continue to an amazing and interesting literature. I am quickly could possibly get a enjoyment of looking at a published book. -- Wellington Rosenbaum TERMS | DMCA ZCJ38TRFRLYR » Book » Do You Know Who I Am? (Paperback) Related Books Genuine] Whiterun youth selection set: You do not know who I am Raoxue(Chinese Edition) Growing Up: From Baby to Adult High Beginning Book with Online Access What Do You Expect? She s a Teenager!: A Hope and Happiness Guide for Moms with Daughters Ages 11-19 Read Write Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • RECEIVED 4T3 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Ar-K NATIONAL REGISTER of HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM INTERAGENCY Ttl 1
    "—————' QMAJ*0 * ¥>M NPS Form 10-900 0018 (Rev. 8-86) RECEIVED 4T3 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service Ar-K NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES REGISTRATION FORM INTERAGENCY ttl 1. Name of Property historic name: Jyrovat Farmstead other name/site number: NFS Tract #113-27, NFS Building #1600-88 2. Location street & number: 696 Streetsboro Road not for publication: N/A city/town: Peninsula vicinity: X state: OH county: Summit code: 153 zip code:44264 3. Classification Ownership of Property: Public-Federal Category of Property: Buildings Number of Resources within Property: Contributing Noncontributing _5_ ____ buildings ____ ____ sites ____ ____ structures ____ ____ objects _5_ _0_ Total Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Reg i ster: _0_ Name of related multiple property listing: Agricultural Resources of Cuyahoga Valley 4. State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1986, as amended, I hereby certify that this t^ nomination ___ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60. In my opinion, the property «^"ineets ___ does not meet the National Register Criteria. __ See continuation sheet. /T^,, ~ f certifying officialY Date State or Federal agency and bureau In my opinion, the property x meets ___ does not meet the National Register criteria. __ See continuation sheet. Signature of commenting or other official Date Ohio Historic Preservation Office -- OHSHPO____________ State or Federal agency and bureau 5.
    [Show full text]