National Motor Freight Traffic Ass'n v. Superior Fast Freight, Inc. (In Re Superior Fast Freight, Inc.)

202 B.R. 485, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 76, 96 Daily Journal DAR 14452, 1996 Bankr. LEXIS 1476, 1996 WL 683815
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedOctober 25, 1996
DocketBAP No. CC-95-2222-HBO, Bankruptcy No. LA93-54051 ER, Adv. No. LA95-01496 ER
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 202 B.R. 485 (National Motor Freight Traffic Ass'n v. Superior Fast Freight, Inc. (In Re Superior Fast Freight, Inc.)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
National Motor Freight Traffic Ass'n v. Superior Fast Freight, Inc. (In Re Superior Fast Freight, Inc.), 202 B.R. 485, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 76, 96 Daily Journal DAR 14452, 1996 Bankr. LEXIS 1476, 1996 WL 683815 (bap9 1996).

Opinion

OPINION

HAGAN, Bankruptcy Judge:

National Motor Freight Traffic Association (“National Motor”) appeals the Bankruptcy Court’s order granting the debtor-in-possession summary judgment on its section 547(b) preference avoidance action. We conclude the payment in issue was not a payment on an antecedent debt and REVERSE and REMAND.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Debtor, Superior Fast Freight, Inc. (“Superior”), is a motor carrier of general commodities. At all times relevant to this appeal, the Interstate Commerce Act (“ICA”) required motor carriers to establish and maintain a freight classification and listing. Superior used the services of National Motor for this purpose.

National Motor is a nonprofit membership corporation organized under the laws of the District of Columbia. National Motor publishes the National Motor Freight Classification (“NMF Classification”) on or about July 1 of each year. National Motor supplements the NMF Classification on an approximately monthly basis. A listing in the NMF Classification satisfies the freight classification and listing requirements of the ICA Cancellation of a motor carrier’s listing voids a carrier’s tariff rate unless the carrier is also listed in another publication.

National Motor charges its participants for each year’s listing in advance. Participants are not required to renew their listing in the NMF Classification for future years. However, because most participants relist each year, National Motor includes all currently listed motor carriers in each new year’s addition, and sends the carriers an invoice for the upcoming year. The invoices state that the fee for the following year must be made in a single payment and that fees will not be prorated for less than a full year. If a carrier fails to timely pay its participation fee, National Motor sends a letter warning that their participation fees are overdue. National Motor cancels the listing of those carriers who do not pay their participation fees for the upcoming year via one of its monthly supplements.

National Motor contends there is no penalty other than removal from its NMF Classification for failure to make timely payment. National Motor seldom receives a request to cancel a listing and does not consider its unilateral listing as giving rise to a claim against a carrier.

*487 Of the some 4,000 carriers listed in the 1992-1993 NMF Classification, 1,506 did not pay their participation fees until after the warning notice was sent. Of these, 356 carriers did not pay their fees after receiving final warning and National Motor cancelled their listings by supplement.

Between June 2,1989, and late 1993, Superior satisfied the requirements of the ICA by listing in the NMF Classification. Consequently, in May of 1993, National Motor sent Superior an invoice for the upcoming fiscal year (ie. July 1, 1993, through June 30, 1994). According to National Motor’s invoice, payment of $2,591.00 was due on or before July 1, 1993, for the upcoming year. Superior did not pay the amount requested before July 1, 1993. Thereafter, National Motor sent Superior two warnings of imminent cancellation, one on July 14, 1993, and one in August of 1993. Both warned Superi- or that if payment was not delivered promptly, National Motor would cancel Superior’s listing in the 1993-1994 NMF Classification. National Motor never requested pro-rata payment from Superior for its participation in NMF Classification between July 30,1993, and the date the warnings were mailed.

Superior eventually forwarded payment by check dated September 9, 1993, which National Motor cashed on September 30, 1993.

Although Superior’s 1993 payment was not substantially later than the late payments National Motor accepted from other motor carriers, it was about two months later than any of Superior’s previous payments. Between 1989 and 1992, National Motor sent its invoices to Superior between May 30 and June 3. Superior paid these invoices sometime between July 7, and July 17 of the relevant years.

Superior filed its voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code on December 16, 1993. National Motor continued to list Superior after its filing. National Motor sent Superi- or an invoice in May of 1994, seeking a participation fee for the July 1,1994, through June 30, 1995, NMF Classification. Because Superior did not submit a fee after receiving several notices, National Motor cancelled Superior’s listing by Supplement No. 6 to NMF 100-U, effective December 3,1994. National Motor has never attempted to collect a fee for the period between July 1, 1994, and December 3,1994.

On February 10, 1995, Superior filed a complaint against National Motor to avoid and recover the September 1993 payment under section 547. The parties agree that the payment was made within the 90 day period preceding the date the Debtor filed its petition for relief.

The bankruptcy judge concluded the September 30, 1993, payment was a payment on an antecedent debt. He also concluded the payment was neither in exchange for new value nor in the ordinary course of business. Accordingly, the judge denied the National Motor’s motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment to Superior. National Motor timely filed this appeal.

STANDARD OF REVIEW

We review a grant of summary judgment de novo. In re Southland + Keystone, 132 B.R. 632, 637 (9th Cir. BAP 1991). If the appellant is entitled to summary judgment, the panel may reverse the bankruptcy court and grant summary judgment in favor of the appellant. C.F. Brookside Ltd. v. Skyview Memorial Lawn Cemetery (In re Affordable Housing Development Corp.), 175 B.R. 324, 329 (9th Cir. BAP 1994) (citing O’Neill v. Continental Airlines, Inc. (In re Continental Airlines, Inc.), 981 F.2d 1450, 1458 (5th Cir.1993)).

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has summarized the standards for granting summary judgment as follows:

“We must determine, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmov-ing party, whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court correctly applied the relevant substantive law.” [Hughes v. United States, 953 F.2d 531, 541 (9th Cir.1992).] ... The party moving for summary judgment must show by “the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, ... that there is no genuine issue .as to any material fact and that the *488 moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); see Hughes, 953 F.2d at 541. Once the moving party meets its initial burden, the nonmoving party must go beyond the pleadings and, by its own affidavits or by the depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, come forth with specific facts to show that a genuine issue of material fact exists. Fed.R.Civ.P.

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

Related

In re: Frances Elizabeth Pass
553 B.R. 749 (Ninth Circuit, 2016)
Kowalski-Schmidt v. Forsch (In Re Giordano)
212 B.R. 617 (Ninth Circuit, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
202 B.R. 485, 97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 76, 96 Daily Journal DAR 14452, 1996 Bankr. LEXIS 1476, 1996 WL 683815, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-motor-freight-traffic-assn-v-superior-fast-freight-inc-in-re-bap9-1996.