PSINet, Inc. v. Cisco Systems Capital Corp. (In Re PSINet, Inc.)

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that § 157(b)(2)(A) can be used, given the careful determination of the bankruptcy judge, to label an adversary proceeding involving a contract action as a core proceeding
• stating that § 157(b)(2)(A) can be used, given the careful determination of the bankruptcy judge, to label an adversary proceeding involving a contract action as a core proceeding
• stating that § 157(b)(2)(A) can be used, given the careful determination of the bankruptcy judge, to label an adversary proceeding involving a contract action as a core proceeding
• recognizing the presence of any one of the four criteria indicates the lessor did not retain a residual interest in the property and therefore, the lease is not a true lease
• noting recharacterization claims raised in stand-alone adversary proceeding before the Court were “no less core than they would be if they had been brought the way they so frequently are, in connection with a litigated dispute (most commonly, a contested matter) under title 11....”
• “[The debtor] cannot terminate its obligations pursuant to the ... Agreement without incurring an obligation to [the lessor] for the full cost of the equipment. Therefore, the first part of the statutory test is satisfied.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).