RCA Corp. v. IDT Inc. (In Re Janesville Lodging Ltd.)

35 B.R. 672, 1983 Bankr. LEXIS 4818
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin
DecidedDecember 20, 1983
Docket1-19-10524
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 35 B.R. 672 (RCA Corp. v. IDT Inc. (In Re Janesville Lodging Ltd.)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
RCA Corp. v. IDT Inc. (In Re Janesville Lodging Ltd.), 35 B.R. 672, 1983 Bankr. LEXIS 4818 (Wis. 1983).

Opinion

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER

ROBERT D. MARTIN, Bankruptcy Judge.

This proceeding came before the court on the plaintiff’s complaint for replevin of leased televisions and telephone equipment. After the parties pleaded the issues, the matter was tried to the court on December 12, 1983; the plaintiff appeared by its attorney Francis J. Demet, and the defendant appeared by its attorney Mark A. Maasch. Upon the evidence presented at trial I make *674 the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The plaintiff, RCA Corporation, is a foreign corporation authorized to do business in Wisconsin with its principal place of business at 3235 North 124th Street, Milwaukee. Plaintiff is engaged in the business of financing, leasing and servicing electronic equipment.

2. The defendant, (“IDT”), is a Wisconsin corporation formerly doing business as Midway Motor Lodge of Janesville with its principal offices located at 3910 Milton Avenue, Janesville, Wisconsin. Since February 1,1983 IDT has been a debtor in chapter 11 in case no. MM11-83-00149 filed in this court.

3. On December 17, 1974 the parties executed a lease agreement dated December 5, 1974 wherein the defendant agreed to lease from the plaintiff 109 JT960 19” Solid State Color Receivers with 106 PD-75 Ped Stands and 106 SK-73 Security Kits (the “T.V. lease”). That lease provided that inter alia:

(a) Delivery could be made in installments,

(b) The lease was to become effective when executed by the lessee and RCA and continue 84 months after the date of completion of the installation of the equipment,

(c) The lessee was to pay an aggregate rental of $52,079.16 in 84 equal monthly installments. The first rental payment was due the day installation of the equipment was completed.

(d) Taxes were to be added to the rental amount, and

(e) In the event of termination prior to completion of the lease term, the lessee agreed to pay inter alia the reasonable rental for the equipment delivered, but there is no right upon termination to accelerate or demand payment of rentals for the remainder of the lease term.

4. On January 6,1975 the parties agreed to make additions to the T.V. lease for background music and a page system, adding $4,116.00 to the aggregate rental. On that same date, they agreed to add a 3M music unit and one 24 hour tape and increase the aggregate rental under the T.V. lease by an additional $944.16.

5. The total aggregate rent to be paid under the T.V. lease as amended was $57,-139.32. Sales tax due on rental payments constitutes an additional amount due under the T.V. lease.

6. The plaintiff delivered the T.V.’s and equipment and installed them. The first delivery consisted of approximately 70 television sets on or about September 1975. Additional television sets sufficient to bring the total sets delivered to approximately 109 were delivered shortly before June 1, 1976, on which date the delivery was certified to be complete.

7. Prior to complete installation of the leased equipment, from October 1975 to March 1976, the defendant made payments to RCA for the use of television sets in the amount of $372.00 per month. In April and May of 1976 the defendant made payments for the use of television sets in the amount of $375.00 per month. These use payments were not rental payments under the T.V. lease.

8. Defendant made total payments under the T.V. lease of approximately $55,-139.74. Subtracting sales tax from the approximate total payments made by the defendant there appears to be a total payment against aggregate rental under the T.V. lease of approximately $52,780.00. The balance remaining due under the T.V. lease is approximately $4,360.00.

9. On January 16, 1975 the parties entered into a lease for certain telephone equipment dated December 13, 1974, (“the telephone lease”) which called for a total aggregate rental of $69,630.00 payable in 120 equal monthly installments. The provisions of the telephone lease are, except for identification of the equipment, the number of payments called for and the amount of aggregate rental, essentially similar to the T.V. lease.

*675 10. On January 16, 1975 the parties agreed to add additional equipment to the telephone lease thereby increasing the aggregate rental by $15,984.00. On May 6, 1976 the parties agreed to replace certain of the telephone equipment and reduce the aggregate rental by $4,280.40.

11. The total aggregate rental called for under the telephone lease as amended was $81,330.60. Sales tax due on rental payments constitutes an additional amount due under the telephone lease.

12. The defendant made total payments under the telephone lease of $58,181.06. Subtracting sales tax from the payments made by the defendant leaves a total payment against the aggregate rental under the telephone lease of approximately $55,-600.00. The balance remaining due under the telephone lease is approximately $25,-700.00.

13. No motion to assume or reject the subject leases has been made by any party nor has any motion been made to compel the assumption or rejection of the leases.

14. The defendant has made no payments under either lease since January 1983 but has continued to have the use of the leased items through the date of trial.

15. The T.V. lease expired by its terms 84 months after June 1, 1976, on June 1, 1983.

16. The T.V. lease made no provision for an extension of its terms or a renewal upon termination. No provision in the lease referred to the rights or obligations of a lessee holding over following the termination of the lease. No agreement was made between the plaintiff and the defendant prior or subsequent to June 1, 1983 with regard to the rights or obligations of the defendant with respect to the property leased under the T.V. lease.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. Because neither lease requires the payment of the entire value of the equipment in the event of default, i.e. there is no acceleration or “hell or high water” clause, each of the leases was on February 1, 1983, an unexpired true lease 1 which could be assumed pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 365 upon order of the court after notice and a hearing.

2. The time during which the T.V. lease could be assumed terminated on June 1, 1983 when the term of the lease expired. 2

3. The defendant is in default on payments due under the T.V. lease by virtue of not paying six or more installments thereon between, January 1983 and June 1, 1983, and is indebted to the plaintiff for $4,293.60 calculated as follows:

aggregate rental $ 57,139.32
+ sales taxes, 4% to 06-01-83 2.205.59
+ sales taxes, 1% 05-01-82 to 06-01-88.43
- payments 55.139.74

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 B.R. 672, 1983 Bankr. LEXIS 4818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rca-corp-v-idt-inc-in-re-janesville-lodging-ltd-wiwb-1983.