United Food & Commercial Workers Union, Local 211 v. Family Snacks, Inc. (In Re Family Snacks, Inc.)

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]here is nothing in the language of § 1113 that dictates when an application to reject must be made.”
• “the Adventure Resources decision [is] inconsistent with the explicit requirement under § 365 that a debtor may assume a contract only upon a motion”
• Congress “clearly manifested its intent that CBAs be treated differently than other executory contracts with respect to rejection.”
• “Implied assumption has no place in the law of executory contracts [in bankruptcy].”
• “A debtor may not, however, fail to take steps to reject the CBA under § 1113 and, at the same time, fail to comply with the terms of the CBA.”
• “Virtually every court that is faced with the issue of whether a Chapter 11 debtor may reject its collective bargaining agreement utilizes a nine-part test that was first set down by the bankruptcy court in In re American Provision Co.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).