My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2021-03-09_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980004 (7)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1980004
>
2021-03-09_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980004 (7)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2021 1:35:25 PM
Creation date
3/16/2021 12:56:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980004
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
3/9/2021
Doc Name Note
Case No. 20-12043 (GRH) Hopedale Mining LLC
Doc Name
Bankruptcy Notice
From
Tasha R. Schreckengost
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
JRS
JDM
GRM
CMM
CCW
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
205
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Case 1:20-bk-12043 Doc 643 Filed 03/03/21 Entered 03/03/21 18:42:10 Desc Main <br />Document Page 14 of 20 <br />40. Recognizing that the Debtors and the Committee preferred to have the Court <br />resolve this dispute, Cortland/AD has followed their suggestion and filed this Application, which <br />includes Holland & Knight's additional fees for time spent (a) addressing the Debtors' and the <br />Committee's various objections to Cortland/AD's original $24,000 fee request and (b) preparing <br />this Application. As of the date of this Application, Cortland/AD is owed $22,500 for the DIP Fee <br />and $50,000 for the reimbursable expenses of its counsel. To the extent that the Debtors or the <br />Committee continue to challenge Cortland/AD's right to be paid under the Final DIP Order and <br />cause it to incur additional expenses, Cortland/AD reserved the right to supplement this <br />Application. <br />Basis for Relief <br />41. The Debtors and the Committee do not dispute, nor could they, that the Final DIP <br />Order entitles Cortland/AD to have its fees and expenses in this case paid as administrative <br />expenses of the Debtors' estates, whether characterized as the DIP Fees and Expenses or the <br />Adequate Protection Fees and Expenses, without the need for Cortland/AD to file payment <br />applications such as this one. <br />42. While the Debtors and the Committee have appeared to drop the argument, it is <br />worth noting that there is no merit to the Committee's original position that the Sale Order limits <br />Cortland/AD's right to have its fees and expenses reimbursed pursuant to the Final DIP Order. As <br />noted above and in Cortland/AD's correspondence with the Debtors and the Committee, Paragraph <br />61.c(iii) of the Sale Order establishes a budget or cap with respect to the lenders' professional fees <br />by providing that "the Prepetition Lenders' and DIP Lenders' professionals' fees shall be paid by <br />the Debtors only to the extent set forth in the Approved Cash Flow Forecast." While the Sale Order <br />incorporates the defined terms of the Final DIP Order by reference (see Sale Order ¶ 60 n.9.), it <br />advisedly does not use the terms "DIP Secured Parties" or "Prepetition Secured Parties," in <br />26594115v.2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.