- 40 -
suggested by Haworth other than the provision to subordinate
loans. It provided that LWSI or Transit would give LIIBV
promissory notes and that the advances, which those notes
represented, would be treated as if they had been made under the
loan agreement. The second "as of September 1, 1986" agreement
substituted a demand feature for a fixed maturity date. LIIBV
did not require Transit, Tree, and LWSI to have a reserve or
sinking fund to assure that they could repay the advances. The
second "as of September 1, 1986" agreement governed all prior
advances by LIIBV to Transit or LWSI.
On July 7, 1987, LTI, Transit, LII, and LWSI signed new loan
agreements with LIIBV. These agreements governed all advances
made by LIIBV to Transit and LWSI before July 7, 1987. They
included the same terms as the "as of September 1, 1986"
agreements, except that (1) the July 7, 1987, agreements
eliminated the demand feature from the previous loan agreements
and established fixed terms with principal balances due September
1, 1989, unless the parties extended the due date by written
agreement, and (2) the parties added some enforcement provisions,
including an acceleration clause. LIIBV did not require a
reserve or sinking fund to assure that petitioners would repay
the advances.
Page: Previous 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011