In re the Rehabilitation of Union Guarantee & Mortgage Co.
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- In re the Liquidation of New York Title & Mortgage Co. (New York Supreme Court 1937)
- In re the Liquidation of Lawyers Title & Guaranty Co. (New York Supreme Court 1937)
- In re the Liquidation of Union Guarantee & Mortgage Co. (New York Supreme Court 1937)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
This is a motion to confirm a referee’s report approving a “ Modified Plan of Reorganization for Union Guarantee and Mortgage Company.” The referee was appointed, pursuant to an order of this court, to hear and report upon the fairness of a plan of reorganization proposed by a committee of the company’s creditors. Although the Superintendent of Insurance and the Mortgage Commission did not approve of the plan originally presented by the committee, they agreed that it was desirable to hold hearings in an endeavor to arrive at a fair and satisfactory plan which would receive the approval and support of the company’s creditors and stockholders.
Extended hearings were held before the referee, as a result of which the plan underwent many amendments and modifications. The referee has approved the plan in its modified form and it is now sought to obtain the court’s approval. At the hearings before the court creditors of the company were represented not only by counsel for the Mortgage Commission and counsel for the Superintendent of Insurance, but also by attorneys for a creditors’ committee and for various individual creditors. The interests of stockholders were represented by counsel for a stockholders’ committee, which in turn represents holders of more than eighty per cent of the company’s stock. As a result of the hearings before the court the plan which the referee has recommended for approval has been further modified in various respects. In its modified form it meets with the approval of the creditors’ committee and the stockholders’ committee and is not opposed by the Superintendent of Insurance.
No useful purpose would be served here by describing the provisions of the plan in detail. A brief summary of its main features will suffice. The plan contemplates that within one month after its approval by the court, the Superintendent of Insurance, as rehabilitator of the company, is to apply for an order of liquidation, and that the creditors’ committee and the assenting creditors are to co-operate with the Superintendent to the end that the liquidation proceedings may be completed and the claims of creditors definitely determined as soon as possible. The assets of the company, with certain specified exceptions, are then to be sold at not less than an upset price to be fixed by the court, and it is contemplated that the creditors’ committee, on behalf of assenting creditors and stockholders, will purchase the assets for a “ New Company ” to be formed by the committee. The “ New Company ” is to liquidate the assets over a period of time and to do such servicing and operation of assets and only such new business as may be conducive to a proper liquidation. The secured loans of the company, held by certain banks and by Reconstruction Finance Corporation, are to
In the court’s opinion, the plan, in its modified form, is beneficial to the interests of creditors and stockholders alike. In the absence of a satisfactory and effective plan of reorganization, the Superintendent of Insurance has indicated his intention to liquidate' the company. This step would necessarily involve forced sales of various assets at sacrifice prices. On the other hand, adoption of the plan of reorganization will enable the creditors to assume direct control of the administration of the assets and to liquidate them over a longer period of time, thereby conserving the company’s equity in assets pledged to secure bank and other loans and also enabling the creditors to ultimately realize the maximum yield from the company’s other assets. As a gradual liquidation is calculated to yield a great deal more than would liquidation by the Superintendent of Insurance, which would necessarily be much more rapid, it is obvious that it is to the advantage of the stockholders as well as the creditors that the plan be adopted.
In the court’s judgment, the provisions of the plan are also fair to creditors as well as stockholders. Unless the creditors’ claims, with interest at the rate of six per cent per annum from the date of the order of liquidation, are paid in full within six months after the final determination of the claims and the transfer of the assests to the “ New Company,” the assenting creditors are to receive one-fourth of the stock of that company. Since no dividends or other distribution may be made on the stock until all participation certificates issued to creditors have been fully paid, it is clear that the stockholders of the present company will in no event receive anything on account of their stock until creditors’ claims have been paid in full with interest. The creditors thus obtain the advantages of a gradual liquidation under their own control and at the same time, unless their claims plus interest are paid within the six-month period, receive a one-fourth interest
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.