Legal Opinion

In Re Harnischfeger Industries, Inc.

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware

Decided May 15, 2003No. 19-50132PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PETER J. WALSH, Chief Judge.

Pending before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment. Dr. Erhard Haekl, the Receiver (the “Receiver”) of Beloit Austria GmbH (“Beloit Austria”) seeks judgment as a matter of law allowing an administrative expense claim totaling $3,445,605.46 (the “Receiver’s Claim”) (Doc.# 11951). 1 The Beloit Liquidating Trust (the “BLT”) seeks summary judgment denying the Receiver’s Claim or, in the alternative, partial summary judgment that § 558 of the Bankruptcy Code 2 applies to permit setoff of the amount of the Receiver’s Claim with amounts…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. The Bremen v. Zapata Off-Shore Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. National Labor Relations Board v. Bildisco & BildiscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. BFP v. Resolution Trust CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. Edgar v. Mite Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Miree v. DeKalb CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1977

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2003
  2. In Re HackneyUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama · 2006
  3. Patriot Scientific Corp. v. KorodiDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2007
  4. LaPlant v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2012
  5. Mancinelli v. Momentum Research, Inc.North Carolina Business Court · 2012

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API