District Court Affirms That Mutuality Requirement For Setoff Under 11 U.S.C. § 553 Cannot Be Supplied By A Multi-Party Agreement Contemplating A Triangular Setoff
Chevron Prods. Co. v. SemCrude, L.P., Case No. 08-11525 (BLS), C.A. No. 09-288 (JJF) (April 30, 2010) (J. Farnan)
Chevron Products Company (“Chevron”) sought relief from the automatic stay (the “Motion for Relief From Stay”) to exercise its contractual right to setoff against certain claims and debts with SemCrude, L.P., SemFuel, L.P., and SemStream, L.P. (collectively the “Debtors”). On January 9, 2009, the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (“Bankruptcy Court”), in an order by Judge Shannon, denied the relief sought, holding that no exception to the “mutuality” requirement under § 553 applied. Chevron filed a motion for reconsideration (the “Motion for Reconsideration”), raising for the first time the safe harbor protections provided under 11 U.S.C. §§ 362(b)(6), (17), (27), 556, 560, and 561. On March 19, 2009, the Court denied Chevron’s Motion for Reconsideration.
On Appeal, the District Court held that the Bankruptcy Court correctly denied both the Motion for Relief From Stay and the Motion for Reconsideration.
Continue Reading...
