In Re D.C. Diamond Head, Inc., 51 B.R. 309 (1985)

Citation: In Re D.C. Diamond Head, Inc., 51 B.R. 309 (1985)
Parent Document: In Re D.C. Diamond Head, Inc., 51 B.R. 309 (1985)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 1985-04-22
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1898470/in-re-dc-diamond-head-inc/ ↗

Full Text

1,060 chars

The 1984 Amendments also include a provision prohibiting cure of defaults and reinstatement of a non-residential real property lease if the lease “has been terminated under applicable non-bankruptcy law prior to” the filing of a voluntary bankruptcy petition. 11 U.S.C. § 365(c)(3) (amended). That amendment applies only to cases filed after October 8, 1984, and hence does not apply to this case. Nevertheless, most authorities believe that this new language is merely declarative of pre-existing law, as construed by most bankruptcy courts, including this one. Although the question is of course not now before me, I do not believe that this linguistic change would affect the result in a case such as this. I construe the quoted language to refer to the entire body of applicable non-bankruptcy law, including (in the District of Columbia) the right to redeem at any time before execution is executed. In other words, I construe the word "terminated” to mean “finally and irredeemably terminated.” 6 . 11 U.S.C. § 365(b)(1)(A). 7 . 11 U.S.C. § 365(b)(1)(C).

Other Sections in This Document (121)

Full Text