In Re Victory Const. Co., Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 5 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 167 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The debtor is attempting to use the provisions of Chapter 11 to create and organize a new business, not to reorganize or rehabilitate an existing enterprise, or to preserve going concern values of a viable or existing business. The debtor knowingly and with full awareness of the economic risks embarked on a speculative real estate promotion, the keystone of which was the ability to retain existing low interest liens in place. This course of conduct was pursued with knowledge that the failure of negotiations with lienholders would leave litigation as the only means available to delay foreclosure (except for payment of the amounts in default). The debtor was operated and guided by persons with shrewd and sophisticated appreciation of (i) the financial realities of the real estate market and real estate finance, (ii) the types of legal recourse available to forestall or delay foreclosure, and (iii) the loss, expense, delay and attrition to secured creditors associated with litigation of the sort contemplated by debtor if negotiations with the lienholders failed.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. United Enterprises, Ltd. v. ACI Sunbow, LLC (In Re ACI Sunbow, LLC) · Natural Land Corporation Natural Land Corporation v. Baker Farms Inc

2. ““Conduct interdicted in the cases can be summarized as conduct which is inconsistent with the underlying purposes and contemplation of the reorganization and rehabilitation process and constitutes a perversion of legislative intent. The cases analyzing these concepts and principals are as consistent with the purposes and objectives of Chapter 11 of the Code as with the prior legislative enactments from which the Code was derived. It would be more than anomalous to conclude that in consolidating the provisions of Chapters X, XI and XII in Chapter 11 of the Code, Congress intended to do away with a safeguard against abuse and misuse of process which had been established and accepted as part of bankruptcy philosophy (either by statute or decisional law) for almost a century. ‘Good faith’ must therefore be viewed as an implicit prerequisite to the filing or continuation of a proceeding under Chapter 11 of the Code.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Erchak

3. “Review and analysis of [the bankruptcy laws and relevant cases] disclose a common theme and objective [underlying the reorganization provisions]: avoidance of the consequences of economic dismemberment and liquidation, and the preservation of ongoing values in a manner which does equity and is fair to rights and interests of the parties affected. But the perimeters of this potential mark the borderline between fulfillment and perversion; between accomplishing the objectives of rehabilitation and reorganization, and the use of these statutory provisions to destroy and undermine the legitimate rights and interests of those intended to benefit by this statutory policy. That borderline is patrolled by courts of equity, armed with the doctrine of `good faith'....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re: Integrated Telecom Express, Inc.