In Re Sea Island Resorts

82 B.R. 404, 1987 Bankr. LEXIS 2142, 1987 WL 39480
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina
DecidedNovember 19, 1987
Docket19-00992
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 82 B.R. 404 (In Re Sea Island Resorts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Sea Island Resorts, 82 B.R. 404, 1987 Bankr. LEXIS 2142, 1987 WL 39480 (S.C. 1987).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11

J. BRATTON DAVIS, Chief Judge.

On consideration of three petitions for involuntary relief filed on July 6, 1987, against the alleged debtor, above-named, and on consideration of the amended petition for involuntary relief filed on November 19,1987 by the petitioners who, on July 6, 1987, filed the three petitions just mentioned 1 an order for relief under chapter *405 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.) is granted.

FACTS

1. Sea Island Resorts (debtor) is a partnership organized and existing under the laws of the State of South Carolina which has as its partners, Prime Coastal, Inc., an Ohio corporation, Sea Island Resorts, Ltd., a Minnesota limited partnership, and Gold Coast Investors, a South Carolina partnership. The debtor conducts business at 62 Marsh View Lane, Harbor Island, Beaufort County, South Carolina.

2. Prime Coastal, Inc., Ellis Mellott and Howard Mease, and William D. Leicht each filed an involuntary petition on July 6,1987 seeking an order for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (11 U.S.C. § 101 et seq.) 2

3. Prime Coastal, Inc., alleges that it is owed $609,000. by the debtor. Part of this debt of $609,000. is evidenced by promissory notes. One of the notes, in the amount of $205,000. and dated November 11, 1985, was assigned to Mellott and Mease; this note forms the basis of the claim of Mellott and Mease.

4. Mellott and Mease each loaned $94,-000. to Prime Coastal, Inc., and each loan was evidenced by a promissory note. In order to secure the payment of these two promissory notes, Prime Coastal, Inc., assigned to Mellott and Mease the note of the debtor in the amount of $205,000. which is described above in Fact No. 3.

5. William D. Leicht (Leicht) is a Certified Public Accountant who has performed work on behalf of the debtor. Leicht’s claim is for $32,000.

6. The petitioners (Prime Coastal, Inc., Mellott and Mease, and Leicht) each filed, on July 6, 1987, an involuntary petition for relief pursuant to § 303 which provides, in part, as follows:

(a) An involuntary case may be commenced only under chapter 7 or 11 of this title, and only against a person, except a farmer or corporation that is not a moneyed, business, or commercial corporation, that may be a debtor under the chapter under which such case is commenced.

(b) An involuntary case against a person is commenced by the filing with the bankruptcy court of a petition under chapter 7 or 11 of this title—

(1) by three or more entities, each of which is either a holder of a claim against such person that is not contingent as to liability or the subject of a bona fide dispute, or an indenture trustee representing such a holder, if such claims aggregate at least $5,000 more than the value of any lien on property of the debtor securing such claims held by the holders of such claims;
******
(3) if such person is a partnership—
(A) by fewer than all of the general partners in such partnership; or
******

(h) If the petition is not timely controverted, the court shall order relief against the debtor in an involuntary case under the chapter under which the petition was filed. Otherwise, after trial, the court shall order relief against the debtor in an involuntary case under the chapter under which the petition was filed, only if—

(1) the debtor is generally not paying such debtor’s debts as such debts become due unless such debts are the subject of a bona fide dispute....

7.Prior to the November 9, 1987 hearing on the involuntary petition, the court granted the motions of Robinson, Grant & Co., P.A., and Wheretogo: Hilton Head Island, to join in the petition seeking to place *406 the debtor in chapter 11. The parties have stipulated as follows: the debtor owes $7,365.46 to Robinson, Grant & Co., P.A.; the debtor owes $2,208.66 to Wheretogo: Hilton Head Island; and both debts are due, neither debt having been paid.

8. The parties have stipulated that the debtor is not paying its debts as such debts become due.

9. In its defense, the debtor makes several allegations. They are as follows: (1) the debtor denies any obligation to Mellott and Mease; (2) in that the debtor never authorized the employment of Leicht to perform any of its accounting work, Leicht is not a creditor of the debtor; (3) the debtor denies that Prime Coastal, Inc., is an unsecured creditor. In addition, the debtor makes two counterclaims. In its first counterclaim, the debtor alleges that Prime Coastal, Inc., defaulted on an obligation to provide operating funds to the debtor. The debtor asserts, in its second counterclaim, that the petition was filed in bad faith and that the debtor should be reimbursed for attorney’s fees, costs and damages, actual and punitive, pursuant to § 303(i)(l).

ISSUES

1. Whether the statutory requirements for the commencement of an involuntary chapter 11 case have been met.

2. Whether the petitioners filed their involuntary petition for relief in bad faith.

DISCUSSION AND COUNTERCLAIM

I

The court finds, under the present facts, that the statutory requirements for the commencement of a chapter 11 case have been met.

The parties have stipulated that “the debtor is generally not paying such debt- or’s debts as such debts become due....” § 303(h)(1). However, the debtor has asserted that the claims of certain petitioners were the subjects of bona fide disputes or were contingent as to liability.

If a claim is contingent as to liability or is the subject of a bona fide dispute, such claim wilLbe excluded from the “generally paying debt” determination. Matter of Covey, 650 F.2d 877 (7th Cir.1981); In re Galaxy Boat Mfg. Co., Inc., 72 B.R. 200 (Bkrtcy.D.S.C.1986). Following Matter of Covey, supra, this court in In re Galaxy Boat Mfg. Co., Inc., supra, adopted a three-part test for determining whether debts should be excluded. Pursuant to the three-part test, a debt will be excluded from the “generally paying debt determination” if:

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

Related

In Re Knoth
168 B.R. 311 (D. South Carolina, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
82 B.R. 404, 1987 Bankr. LEXIS 2142, 1987 WL 39480, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-sea-island-resorts-scb-1987.