Laserfiche WebLink
All of these requests for relief fail to state claims upon which relief can be granted <br /> because the Liquidation Plan, as to parties to MCR's bankruptcy, is a judgment and not a <br /> contract. Although the Liquidation Plan refers to a reclamation plan, it does not contain the <br /> specifics of, or incorporate, any reclamation plan; it merely alludes to one. As between MCR <br /> and the Division, the Liquidation Plan is a judgment, a judgment which requires the Division to <br /> use the funds distributed pursuant to the Liquidation Plan for reclamation. If the Division were <br /> to use Liquidation Plan funds for purposes other than reclamation, it would violate the judgment. <br /> In addition, if the Liquidation Plan were a contract, as MCR alleges, MCR would not be able to <br /> request this Court to change the terms of that contract by requesting a change in the reclamation <br /> plan the way MCR does in its amended complaint. Moreover, federal case law supports that the <br /> Liquidation Plan in this matter is a judgment and not a contract. <br /> The Tenth Circuit has twice held that"a confirmed plan functions as a judgment with <br /> regard to those bound by the plan . . ." In re Talbot, 124 F.3d 1201, 1209 (10th Cir. 1997); Paul <br /> v. Monts, 906 F.2d 1468, 1471 & n. 3 (10th Cir. 1990). The Paul v. Monts court specifically <br /> decided that where there were many outstanding terms of conditions to be fulfilled regarding <br /> transfers of loans and assets between parties to the bankruptcy, there were no agreements on key <br /> terms and therefore no contract existed. Id. at 1472-73. Here, "reclamation" is not an easily <br /> definable, set course of action but a complicated process that requires many professional <br /> judgment calls and interpretations about how best to effectuate reclamation, taking into <br /> consideration site-specific conditions. Even if it were possible to construe a Chapter 11 <br /> bankruptcy plan as a contract rather than a judgment, here, where there is no meeting of the <br /> minds, such a construction is unacceptable. Id. Accordingly, by alleging that the Liquidation <br /> 6 <br />