In the Matter of Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company, Debtor v. Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company

835 F.2d 682
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
DecidedFebruary 22, 1988
Docket86-1109
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 835 F.2d 682 (In the Matter of Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company, Debtor v. Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In the Matter of Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company, Debtor v. Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company, 835 F.2d 682 (7th Cir. 1988).

Opinion

COFFEY, Circuit Judge.

This case arises from the bankruptcy of the Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company (“Rock Island”). The dispute concerns an interpretation of the remedies section of the Equipment Sublease Agreement (“the Sublease”) between Rock Island and the petitioner, the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac Railroad Company (“RF & P”). RF & P and Rock Island entered into the Sublease while Rock Island was in bankruptcy. RF & P seeks to enforce a liquidated damages provision contained in the Sublease. The district judge, who has overseen the bankruptcy of Rock Island since its filing in 1975, refused to enforce the provision, finding that his Early Termination Order had extinguished the Sublease before RF & P gained a right to liquidated damages. RF & P appeals the decision.

FACTS

On March 17, 1975, Rock Island filed a petition for reorganization pursuant to section 77 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C. §§ 1161-74 (1982 & Supp.1986). The United States- District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (“the Reorganization Court”) determined that the Rock Island line could be reorganized as a viable railroad and so ordered that the Trustee continue Rock Island's rail operations. Rock Island was required to purchase new equipment, including rolling stock, in order that it might continue its rail operations. The new equipment was purchased on credit. Thus, financing the ongoing rail operations gave rise to an inherent conflict between the new investors, who wanted security for *683 their advances to Rock Island, and the stockholders and prior creditors, who wanted to guard their places in the queue for the assets of the bankrupt business. In fact, during the first year of Rock Island’s bankruptcy, this court was called upon to adjudicate a dispute over Rock Island’s long-term lease of fifty-six locomotives. See In re Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RR, 545 F.2d 1087 (7th Cir.1976).

The Sublease at issue reflects the divergent interests of the stockholders and older creditors on the one hand, as contrasted with more recent creditors on the other. RF & P, as owner-lessor, provided twenty-five percent of the financing for the purchase of four hundred piggyback trailers (“the Equipment”) and remained liable for the balance. The Equipment was then leased to Intermodal Services, Inc. (“Inter-modal”), and in turn was subleased to Rock Island. (Tax considerations governed much of the transaction’s structure.) 1 To protect its investment, RF & P sought the highest possible lien priority for the liabilities of the Rock Island under the Sublease. The Reorganization Court agreed that those liabilities would be deemed administrative expenses, senior to the interests of Rock Island’s stockholders and pre-bank-ruptcy creditors. In addition, the parties agreed to the liquidated damages clause now at issue. The liquidated damages clause provides that, in the event of a default during the life of the Sublease, RF & P, upon notifying Rock Island of the default and terminating the Sublease, could recover not only rentals already accrued, but also compensation for its loss of future earnings under the Sublease.

Rock Island stockholders and prior creditors were concerned with the railroad’s potentially large liabilities under long-term equipment leases should Rock Island decide to end its rail operations. In order to protect its investment, it was agreed by the parties that the term of the Sublease be limited by an “Early Termination” clause. In that clause, the parties also agreed that if the Reorganization Court ordered Rock Island to discontinue rail service, the Sublease would be terminated and Rock Island’s liability under the Sublease would be limited to obligations previously accrued, in addition to the various costs associated with redelivering the Equipment to RF & P. 2

*684 The Sublease was executed on October 1, 1978 and was approved by the Reorganization Court on November 9, 1978. In less than a year, Rock Island's financial position became more precarious. On September 26, 1979, the Interstate Commerce Commission (“the ICC”) determined that Rock Island’s cash position made its continuing operation impossible and ordered the Kansas City Terminal Railway Company (“KCT”) to operate the Rock Island system, pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 11125 (1982 & Supp.1986). Under the ICC order, KCT was required to make rental payments due under the Sublease on behalf of Rock Island. On January 25, 1980, the Reorganization Court ordered the Trustee to prepare a plan for the liquidation of Rock Island’s estate.

KCT made the payments due on the Sublease from October 1979 through March 1980. On March 31, 1980, the ICC order expired. Although the Trustee believed that KCT would also make the payment due on April 1, 1980, KCT failed to do so. Failure to make that payment constituted an event of default under the Sublease and entitled RF & P to pursue the remedies available under section 14.2 of the Sublease, including liquidated damages under section 14.2(b). However, neither RF & P nor Intermodal (see supra at 683) immediately notified Rock Island that it was in default.

On May 5, 1980, the Trustee appeared before the Reorganization Court and requested an Early Termination Order. The court declined to issue the order on May 5 because not all interested parties were prepared to respond to the Trustee’s request. However, the court stated that the status quo would be preserved until May 9, when the issue would be finally resolved. On May 9, 1980, before the hearing scheduled for discussion of the Early Termination Order, counsel for Intermodal served the Trustee with written notice of default. The notice of default purported to preserve all of Intermodal’s rights under section 14.2 of the Sublease, but did not explicitly terminate the Sublease. RF & P did not appear at the May 9 hearing. Following the hearing, the court entered its Early Termination Order and stated that the order terminated the lease effective May 5, 1980. Months later, on August 25, 1980, RF & P sent Rock Island notice of termination of the Sublease.

After entry of the Early Termination Order, Rock Island returned the Equipment to RF & P, pursuant to section 13.2 of the Sublease. On appeal, we are asked to determine the applicability of the liquidated damages provision of section 14.2(b) of the Sublease. Since entry of the Early Termination Order, RF & P has. acquired all rights under the Sublease, including those of Intermodal. In addition, the Chicago Pacific Corporation (“CPC”), the reorganized version of Rock Island, has replaced the Trustee as the representative of the interests of Rock Island. Thus, only RF & P and CPC are parties to this dispute. THE TRIAL-REORGANIZATION COURT’S DECISION

The Reorganization Court rejected RF & P’s bid to collect liquidated damages under section 14.2(b) of the Sublease.

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

Related

United States v. Amin Ataya
864 F.2d 1324 (Seventh Circuit, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
835 F.2d 682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-the-matter-of-chicago-rock-island-and-pacific-railroad-company-debtor-ca7-1988.