Skip to main content
S.D. New York· 10/29/2001

In Re Teligent, Inc.

Citations

  • 268 B.R. 723
  • 2001 Bankr. LEXIS 1372
  • 38 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 158
  • 2001 WL 1325951

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding after a comprehensive review of the legislative history of the BRA that Section 365(c)(2) was specifically designed to defeat “a pre-petition agreement obligating the non-debtor to advance new cash or credit in exchange for the debtor’s” stock
  • “the buyer’s breach of its payment obligation [is] material, making the contract executory on that side”
  • performance was material because “each performance goes to the essence of what the other party sought and expected when he entered into the Merger Agreement, and without it, the party will lose the benefit of the bargain that he thought he struck”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Stuart M. Bernstein

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

23 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.