In re DelFarno

144 B.R. 950, 1992 Bankr. LEXIS 1489, 1992 WL 229055
CourtDistrict Court, D. Rhode Island
DecidedSeptember 16, 1992
DocketBankruptcy No. 91-11324
StatusPublished

This text of 144 B.R. 950 (In re DelFarno) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re DelFarno, 144 B.R. 950, 1992 Bankr. LEXIS 1489, 1992 WL 229055 (D.R.I. 1992).

Opinion

ORDER

ARTHUR N. VOTOLATO, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge.

Before the Court is the Trustee’s Application to Compromise various controversies among the Trustee, the Debtor, the Debt- or’s wife, and First National Bank of Boston. All of those parties consent to the compromise. We ordered the written position of the United States Trustee, who filed a response simply indicating that he “has no objection.” 1

We conducted a hearing on August 13, 1992 to afford the parties an opportunity to satisfy the Court of any benefit to the estate in approving the Compromise. We are not so moved.

The approval of applications to compromise are committed to the sound discretion of the bankruptcy court. See In re Hydronic Enter., Inc., 58 B.R. 363, 365 (Bankr.D.R.I.1986). While policy considerations and judicial economy may favor approval of proposed settlements, the interests of creditors must remain paramount. Id. at 365; In re C.P. del Caribe, Inc., 140 B.R. 320, 325 (Bankr.D.P.R.1992); cf. Durrett v. Housing Auth. of Providence, 896 F.2d 600, 604 (1st Cir.1990) (“courts are duty bound to scrutinize even voluntary settlement proposals”) (Torruella, J., concurring). In this instance, the nub of the Trustee’s argument in favor of approval is the anticipated cost and complexity of the litigation. While this is certainly one factor to be taken into consideration, we are not persuaded that the Trustee has made adequate efforts to protect the potential recovery for unsecured creditors. The assets here are substantial and the alleged conduct of the Trustee’s adversaries, if proved, is most egregious.

[951]*951Accordingly, in the present best interest of the estate, the Application to Compromise is DENIED, and the Trustee is ORDERED to proceed with the prosecution of any and all causes of action he may have. Failing that, or if the Trustee does not feel that he can proceed in good faith with this instruction, the Court will consider the appointment of a substitute or successor Trustee.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re C.P. Del Caribe, Inc.
140 B.R. 320 (D. Puerto Rico, 1992)
In Re Hydronic Enterprise, Inc.
58 B.R. 363 (D. Rhode Island, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
144 B.R. 950, 1992 Bankr. LEXIS 1489, 1992 WL 229055, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-delfarno-rid-1992.