Still v. S. Rasnick Co. (In Re Jorges Carpet Mills, Inc.)

41 B.R. 60, 1984 Bankr. LEXIS 5712
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee
DecidedMay 10, 1984
DocketBankruptcy No. 1-80-02516, Adv. No. 1-81-0137
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 41 B.R. 60 (Still v. S. Rasnick Co. (In Re Jorges Carpet Mills, Inc.)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Still v. S. Rasnick Co. (In Re Jorges Carpet Mills, Inc.), 41 B.R. 60, 1984 Bankr. LEXIS 5712 (Tenn. 1984).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

RALPH H. KELLEY, Bankruptcy Judge.

In December, 1980, creditors filed an involuntary bankruptcy petition against Jorg-es Carpet Mills, Inc. (Jorges). About this time, Jorges transferred to S. Rasnick and Company, Inc., (Rasnick) a large quantity of carpet yarn and numerous metal storage baskets used in shipping the yarn.

The court entered an order for relief as to Jorges and appointed C. Kenneth Still as trustee. 11 U.S.C. § 1104. The trustee brought this suit against Rasnick to recover the baskets or their value and to recover the difference between the alleged value of the yarn and the price paid by Rasnick.

Some of the transfers were made between filing of the petition and entry of the order for relief.

The fact that they occurred before the order for relief makes no difference to the trustee’s right to avoid them as post-petition transfers. Section 303(f) authorizes transfers by the debtor during this “involuntary gap” period, but § 549(a) allows the trustee to avoid transfers of property of the bankruptcy estate after commencement of the case, which is the time of filing of the petition. 11 U.S.C. §§ 303(b) & (f), 541(a) & 549(a). Section 549(a) provides:

(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) ... the trustee may avoid a transfer of property of the estate—
(1) that occurs after the commencement of the case; and
(2)(A) that is authorized under section 303(f) ... of this title; or
(B) that is not authorized under this title or by the court.

As to the transfers after the order for relief, no one has contended that they were authorized even though the involuntary petition was' filed under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. See 11 U.S.C. §§ 363(c)(1), 1106 & 1108. Thus, all the post-petition transfers are subject to avoidance under § 549(a).

Transfers during the involuntary gap period are partially protected under § 549(b). It provides:

(b) In an involuntary case, a transfer that occurs after the commencement of such case but before the order for relief is valid against the trustee to the extent of any value, including services, but not including satisfaction or securing of a debt that arose before commencement of the case, given after commencement of the case in exchange for such transfer, notwithstanding any notice or knowledge of the case that the transferee has.

This in effect means that the trustee can recover to the extent the property transferred was worth more than what the transferee paid.

There is no statute specifically extending this protection to transfers after the order for relief, but the same result should be reached at least when the transferee takes in good faith. See 11 U.S.C. § 550(c) & (d).

As to all the postpetition transfers the trustee is generally entitled to recover to the extent the value of the yarn and the baskets exceeded the price paid by Rasnick. As to the baskets, the trustee contends that they were not included in the sale of the yarn and Rasnick paid nothing for them. Of course, the trustee can also recover if the baskets were included in the sale but Rasnick paid less than they were worth. As to the yarn, the trustee con *62 tends that Rasnick paid much less for the yarn than it was worth.

Essentially the same rule applies to the pre-petition transfers under § 548(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code, except that the trustee must also prove that Jorges was insolvent at the time of the transfers. During the testimony of the trustee’s accountant, Rasnick’s attorney indicated that it did not dispute Jorges’s insolvency at the time of the transfers. The accountant testified that Jorges was insolvent at the time and had been for several years. There was no contradictory evidence.

Findings of Fact

For some years prior to the filing of the involuntary petition against Jorges, it was engaged in the manufacture of carpet. It was also in financial difficulty. In 1977 it had filed a petition for reorganization under chapter XI of the Bankruptcy Act of 1898. Jorges was operating under the reorganization plan confirmed in that case when the involuntary petition was filed on December 19, 1980.

Rasnick was engaged in the buying and selling of yarn used in the manufacture of carpet. The yarn is generally packaged on cone-shaped spools. A spool of yarn is often referred to as a cone. A cone that has been mostly used and has little yarn remaining is called a “skinner”.

The yarn is generally shipped in cardboard boxes, but wire baskets like those in question are sometimes used. A wire basket is about 2 to 3 feet high, 3 to 4 feet wide, 3 to 4 feet long, and weighs 115 to 120 pounds. The sides of the higher quality baskets fold down for flat storage. Apparently some or most of the baskets in question had folding sides.

The baskets are used in the warehouse for storage and during the manufacturing process to hold the yarn so that it can be easily reached.

Art Kanfer was Rasnick’s agent in buying the yarn from Jorges. He testified as follows. Ed Jorges negotiated the sale on Jorges’s behalf. He showed Kanfer yarn in Jorges’s plant and warehouse. The yarn in the plant was mostly small packages, not full cones. The yarn in the warehouse included two large lots. Kanfer understood that he was buying all the yarn he saw and that the sale was a going out of business sale. He asked Ed Jorges if the yarn in the baskets would be boxed and Ed Jorges told him that Rasnick would get the baskets. He offered Ed Jorges 45 cents per pound for all the yarn including the baskets. Ed Jorges cleared the sale with Charles Housch, who was the chief executive of Jorges. The yarn did not include any original, unopened boxes. Without the baskets, it would have been worth 30 to 35 cents per pound. This sale included about 60,000 pounds of yarn' and was the largest odd lot sale negotiated by Kanfer. The yarn was shipped out in six truck loads. All the trailers were “pretty full”. When a truck was full, the total price was figured and Rasnick had to wire the money before Jorges would release the truck. Kanfer had no idea what the baskets would sell for separately.

Mike Parker worked in the warehouse at Jorges when the yarn was shipped. He testified as follows.

The wire baskets were used in the warehouse for storage. At least 115 to 120 were shipped to Rasnick and perhaps as many as 150 to 160. Parker didn’t keep an exact count. He did weigh the boxes and baskets. At some time during the shipping, Ed Jorges came to the warehouse and complained about the baskets being shipped to Rasnick. Parker thought that his supervisor, Eddie Adams, and Art Kan-fer were present at the time.

One-half to 70% of the yarn shipped to Rasnick was in full cones or nearly full cones. The balance was skinner.

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

Related

United States v. Williams
1 C.M.A. 186 (United States Court of Military Appeals, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 B.R. 60, 1984 Bankr. LEXIS 5712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/still-v-s-rasnick-co-in-re-jorges-carpet-mills-inc-tneb-1984.