Kenton County Bondholders Committee v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. (In Re Delta Air Lines, Inc.)

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that mutual releases were integral to the settlement and could not be severed in light of language stating “all provisions of this agreement are essential, non-sever-able terms”
• finding that it would be “inequitable to undo the Settlement to benefit a small number of dissenting Bondholders,” and that this “contribute[s] to a finding of equitable mootness”
• severance of settlement agreement incorporated into reorganization plan “would ignore the tradeoff that allowed the parties to settle in the first instance”
• a bankruptcy court’s finding that a Rule 9019 settlement is reasonable may only be overturned where “no reasonable man could agree with the decision to approve the settlement”
• “[T]the matter before the Bankruptcy Court was a motion pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9019 to approve a Settlement, not an adjudication on the merits of individual tort or contract claims . . . .”
• severance of settlement agreement incorporated into reorganization

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).