H.M.B. Associates v. Wilmington Development Corp. (In re Wilmington Development Corp.)
In Re WILMINGTON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC., Debtor. H.M.B. ASSOCIATES, Pocono Futures, Inc., and Frank Maiorana, Plaintiffs, v. WILMINGTON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, INC., Defendant
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION EMIL F. GOLDHABER, Bankruptcy Judge:
The problem before us is procedural. This is a chapter 11 case, filed by a corporation. Undaunted by the crystal clear provision of section 727(a) of the Bankruptcy Code that (a) The court shall grant the debtor a discharge, unless— (1) the debtor is not an individual which obviously means that partnerships and corporations can no longer receive a discharge, the plaintiffs in the case at bench ... pray your Honorable Court to refrain from discharging the debtor...
No plan has been proposed in this case. Hence, no plan has been confirmed. If and when that occurs, § 1141(d) provides that the confirmation of the plan— (A) discharges the debtor from any debt that arose before the date of such confirmation...
Of course, § 1128 provides that:
(a) After notice, the court shall hold a hearing on confirmation of a plan.
(b) A party in interest may object to confirmation of a plan.
*517 Since no plan has been proposed, no hearing on confirmation has been held. When and if a plan is proposed and a hearing is held, the plaintiffs may then file such objections as are required by Interim Rule 3008.
But the pleading presently before us, i.e., an “Amended Complaint objecting to Discharge,” is an erroneous, faulty, improper pleading, and the debtor’s motion to dismiss must be sustained.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.