Ludovico Technique wrote:denimchickn wrote:I don't think I've ever been as confused about anything in my life as I am about non-assignable/non-assumable executory contracts in bankruptcy and In re Catapult Entertainment. WTF?
I actually paid attention to that case since it had to do with video games. Basically the DIP (Catapult) wanted to assume a contract that would normally be nonassignable under federal law. But they didn't want to assign it. And they argued that since they didn't want to assign it, they should be able to assume it. (Actual test). But the court held that the plain meaning of the statute (365c1) called for a hypothetical test. If hypothetically the non-Dr party would be entitled to block assignment, then the DIP can't assume.
This is contrary to the intent of Congress, but they suck at drafting statutes so that's the law.
That was really helpful. Thank you so much.
Unfortunately I feel so screwed that I can't even calm down enough to focus right now. I've legitimately never felt to unprepared for something I've put so much time into. Time to cut my losses, try to get some sleep, and wake up tomorrow to take my terrible grade.