In re Sullivan Clark & Associates, Inc.

65 B.R. 356, 1986 Bankr. LEXIS 5327
District Court, D. Rhode Island·Decided September 12, 1986·No. Bankruptcy No. 8300679·Published

Opinion

ORDER

ARTHUR N. VOTOLATO, Jr., Bankruptcy Judge.

Heard on May 7, 1986 on Sullivan Clark & Associates’ motion to amend Schedule B-3(b), wherein the debtor requests:

That the entry;

Book of Insurance Policies in force located at 9 Plymouth Road, East Providence, Rhode Island — value $75,000.00, be amended to read; Contract rights due under agreement dated November 1, 1982 from Hague & Marso Realty, Inc.— value $2,000.00.

Charles Mason,1 a creditor, objects to the motion to amend, arguing that the so-called book of accounts is an asset of the debtor which Mason is entitled to purchase from the trustee. See Memorandum, dated May 14, 1986.

A statement of the travel of the instant controversy is amply set out in the two prior orders attached, and does not bear repeating. After considering the arguments of counsel, we find that:

1. On November 1, 1982 the debtor entered into an agreement with Hague & Marso Realty, Inc., pursuant to which the book of accounts in question was transferred to, and became property of Hague & Marso, subject to certain terms and conditions in the agreement. See Debtor’s Exhibit A, Article 2, paragraph (d).
2. The book of accounts was not an asset of the estate at the time the debt- or’s bankruptcy petition was filed on September 26, 1983, and the trustee is not authorized to sell that property.
3. To the extent that the debtor retained an interest in the book of accounts after November 1982, that interest was in the nature of a personal services contract, and is non-transferable.
[358]*3584. The estate is entitled to payment of commissions from Hague & Marso for services performed by Sullivan Clark & Associates, Inc. prior to the bankruptcy filing, in an amount to be later determined by the Court, in accordance with the formula provided in Article 3 of the November 1982 agreement.

Accordingly, based upon the findings and conclusions, 1 through 4 above, the debt- or’s motion to amend Schedule B-3(b) (which was supported by the trustee and Hague & Marso) is granted, except that the dollar value of the debtor’s “contract rights due under [the November 1982 agreement]” will be determined after submission by the debtor of appropriate documentation.2 Finally, any deposit made by Mason in connection with the purchase of the book of accounts should be refunded to him forthwith.

Footnotes

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

In re Sullivan Clark & Associates, Inc., 65 B.R. 356, 1986 Bankr. LEXIS 5327 (D.R.I. 1986).

65 B.R. 356 (In re Sullivan Clark & Associates, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.