Res 1993-185 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I bl/ k( pr-efer-ence was r-esolved by the Court when the Court ruled in HealthVest' s favor on HealthVest's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Pledge of San Marcos Stock). The only other allegations of preferences which were nc.:, addressed in Heal thVest ' s prior Motions and which were decided upon by the Court prior- to the' settlement discussed below, consist of: (i) additional rent paid by the Debtors to He-:thVest during the one year period preceding both HII's and the HI! Subsidianes' bankruptcy filings; (ii) rent paid on the Austin Diagnostic Clinic on December 6, 1990 for November occupancy; (iii) r-ent ,paid on Kahi Mohala on November 29, 1991 for October occupancy, and the Kahi Mohala-General Exise Tax; (iv) rent paid on Meadow Pines on November 29, 1991 for- October- occupancy; (v) all payments made on the Azar-, San Mar-cos, Meadow Pines, Torrey Pines and Tustin mortgages; (vi) all payments made on the New Defer-r-al Note; and (vii) the pledge of the HI! tax refWld Wlder the Interim Restructuring Àgreement. The Debtors' attempt to recharacterize the leases between HealthVest and the D.ebtor-s as loans or- equity contributions was resolved by the Court when it ruled in HealthVest's favor on both HealthVest's Second Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Recharacterization of Sale-Leaseback Transactions) and Brief in Support Thereof on November- 19, 1992, and HealthVest's Sixth Motion for- Partial Summa ry Judgment (Rechar-acterization Claims) and Brief in Support Thereof on December 16, 1992. Finally, the Debtors' effort to have HealthVest's claims equitably subordinated also failed. On January 6, 1993, the Court ruled in HealthVest's favor on HealthVest's Seventh Motion for- Par-tial Summary iJudgment (Equitable Subor-dination of Claims) and after finding insufficient evidence of wr-ongdoi~g by HealthVest. On Febr-uar-y 16, 1993, the Bankruptcy Cour-t appr-oved the Motion to Compr-omise Controversies in Àdversary No. 91-1334-LK pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9019 (the "HealthVest Compr-omise"). Pur-S:.lant to the HealthVest Compromise, all causes of action against HealthVest on which the Bankruptcy Court had not pr-eviously r-uled (certain pr-efer-ence claims) wer-e dismissed with prejudice to refiling. Às for all causes of action on which the Bankruptcy Court granted summary judgment in favor of HealthVest, those rulings have been included in a final judgment in favor of HealthVest. In accordance with the agreement, HI! and the other Plaintiffs have filed a motion for new trial which the Court is set to consider in August. Since the HealthVest Plan was not confirmed by July 6,1993, the Plaintiffs may elect to pursue their appeal rights on the final judgment. However, the hearing on the motion for new trial has been continued Wltil October 27, 1993. If the HealthVest Plan is confirmed and consummated, the Parent Plan and this Plan will act as a release of all claims against HealthVest included in the final judgment. - 33 - a-20155