Skip to main content
· 3/15/1985

Lubrizol Enterprises, Inc. v. Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., in Re Richmond Metal Finishers, Inc., Debtor

Citations

  • 756 F.2d 1043
  • 12 Collier Bankr. Cas. 2d 310
  • 226 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 961
  • 1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 29723
  • 12 Bankr. Ct. Dec. (CRR) 1281

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the licensor’s contingent duty of indemnifying the licensee was material
  • observing that issue of whether contract is executory is one of law
  • explaining that a contract is executory when performance is due from both parties
  • adopting executory contracts definition propounded by Vern Countryman, Executory Contracts in Bankruptcy: Part I, 57 Minn. L. Rev. 439, 460 (1973)
  • “The unperformed, continuing core obligations of notice and forbearance in licensing made the contract executory as to [the defendant].”
  • “The unperformed, continuing core obligations of notice and forbearance in licensing made the contract executory as to [the defendant].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Butzner, Phillips, Wilkinson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.