Laserfiche WebLink
<br />15. Tne CLM entered Into the Settlement Agreement and Ae lease <br />in good to ith ae part of arms-length negoi Satlone. <br />Points and Authors See <br />in Amerlc n Emol vere' Ins C v K1 Aea ur C , 556 <br />F2d. f7], a75 (10th Clr. 1977) the Tenth Circuit Court oC Appea la <br />approved a ten factor teat enumerated by Che trial court in <br />connection with the sett lemenC of lltlga tlon under the Bankruptcy <br />Act. In Ael es v. Agg~enn, 881 F2d. 890, 891 (10th Cir. 1989) e <br />ca sa under the Bankruptcy Coda, rho Tenth Clrcult acknowledged the <br />ten [actor teat o[ Klno Resources Co. ae controlllnq !n conneotion <br />vl th [he approval of a settlement and compramisa under the <br />Bankruptcy Coda, however, the Tenth Clrcult in Aa isa v. Newmann <br />focused pe rticulnrly on the issue of the like llhood o[ suttees end <br />Che expected ezpenee and delay ceased by lltlq etlon .' Other <br />factors enunelatad Sn Klnm Aeeourcee Co. that you ld arguable apply <br />Co the settlement between the CLM and Tr Lntded include the number <br />of pert Les that object to Che sett lemen [, the competency and <br />•xpar Lnea of counsel who support the •attlwmant sod the aatent to <br />vhlcR [he settleman[ la truly the product of arms-length <br />bargn In log. A bankruptcy court's approval of a compromlee may be <br />disturbed only when St achieves en unjust result amounting to a <br />clear abuse oC dlscretlon, provided, however, the bankruptcy <br />'Because case vea a very large, complex case lnvo Lv lnq a <br />sett lament that vas put together over a period Sn excess oC two <br />yeah and involved some C_rty (t0) dietineC repraeantat ive groups <br />or parties hot^ing sharp, sntagonintic and con[llcting interests, <br />several of the ten (t0) factors enumerated are not appl lceble to <br />many settlements inc luding the settlement in thin case. <br />5 <br />court's decision to approve the settlement must be an informed one <br />based upon en object ive eve luation of developed Cnctn. Relsa v. <br />Hacmann et pqa. 890 and 891. Bee also U B. V. Aerdame, 982 F.3d <br />1x91 (10th Cir. 199]). <br />I[ the Trinidad cla lm vere li [lgeted, the Civ•s exposure could <br />range between $0 end epprox lme tely $63,000; Rovever, given the <br />number of legal Se sues related to the Lnterpretstion of the Aaest <br />Purchase Agreement and the pa riles dui les and tecpone lbll It lea <br />thereunder, the number of factual Seeuee related to the scope end <br />coat o[ clean up end the legal end expert toa• eeoocla tad with a <br />tr la 1, the Ctv believes in its bus loess iudgment that the <br />sett lenient of the Request [or Payment o[ Adminietretlve Expense <br />filed by Trin Sdad le !n the beet Lnterast of the Civ estate end rte <br />creditors. <br />Recuested Relief <br />8aeed on the foregoing Motion end Memorandum, the Civ req assts <br />the Court enter an Order: <br />A. Mek log tlndinge oC Cact and coot lueions of lev cone latent <br />herewith; <br />B. Approvf nq the 6att lament Agraomant end Re lasso ae e <br />settlement and compromlee of a dispute under 11 U.S.C. 5 105 end <br />Aula 9039 of the Federal Ru lee of Bankruptcy Procedure, Snclud log <br />the allowance o[ tba Request toz Payment at Administrst Sve Expanse <br />of Trinidad !n the amount of $73,000.00, end authorizinq the <br />lmplamant ion of iha Settlement Agreement and Releees, inc luding the <br />payment of $12,000.00 to Trln ldad In full eettlemen[ of its <br />6 <br />