C-Tc 9th Avenue Partnership v. Norton Company
This text of 196 B.R. 666 (C-Tc 9th Avenue Partnership v. Norton Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
C-TC 9TH AVENUE PARTNERSHIP, Plaintiff,
v.
NORTON COMPANY, Defendant.
United States District Court, N.D. New York.
Certilman, Balin, Adler & Hyman, LLP, East Meadow, New York (Michael D. Brofman, of counsel), for Plaintiff.
DeGraff, Foy, Holt-Harris, Mealey & Kunz, LLP, Albany, New York (Robert J. Rock, of counsel), for Defendant.
Arnis Zilgme, Town Attorney, Newtonville, New York (William Nowak, of counsel), for Creditor Town of Colonie.
Cusick, Hacker & Murphy, Latham, New York (David R. Murphy, of counsel), for Creditor Maplewood School District.
ORDER
CHOLAKIS, District Judge.
Presently before the Court is an appeal of the Memorandum-Decision and Order of Bankruptcy Judge Robert E. Littlefield, Jr., dated June 28, 1995, wherein he dismissed the case of debtor C-TC 9th Avenue Partnership. This Court hereby AFFIRMS for substantially the reasons set forth in Bankruptcy Judge Littlefield's thorough decision regarding the ineligibility of a dissolved partnership to proceed under Chapter 11. In re C-TC 9th Avenue Partnership, 193 B.R. 650 (Bankr.N.D.N.Y.1995). Accordingly, that further portion of the decision, based upon a determination that this case was not filed in good faith, need not be considered by this Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
196 B.R. 666, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8598, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/c-tc-9th-avenue-partnership-v-norton-company-nynd-1996.