Oren L. Benton - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
          148 (2d Cir. 2000); Duebler v. Sherneth Corp., 160 F.2d 472, 474            
          (2d Cir. 1947).                                                             
               Similarly, the phrase “termination of an estate” has, by               
          necessity, been interpreted and defined by numerous bankruptcy              
          courts.  For example, one bankruptcy court, in deciding whether             
          the bankruptcy estate had incurred certain administrative                   
          expenses in a chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding, held that the               
          estate had terminated upon the confirmation of the plan of                  
          reorganization.  See In re Westholt Manufacturing, Inc., 20                 
          Bankr. 368 (1982), affd. sub nom. United States v. Redmond, 36              
          Bankr. 932 (D. Kan. 1984).  In the In re Westholt case, the                 
          Government argued that the debtor’s unpaid employment taxes were            
          incurred while the debtor was under chapter 11 bankruptcy                   
          protection and therefore the taxes were administrative expenses             
          of the estate.  In In re Westholt the Government argued, as it              
          has in the case before us:                                                  
               until a case is closed pursuant to a final decree at                   
               the consummation of the Chapter 11 plan, the bankruptcy                
               estate remains in existence and the court retains                      
               jurisdiction over the reorganization plan so that                      
               employment and unemployment taxes incurred by the                      
               debtor in possession following confirmation of the plan                
               are taxes incurred by the estate and, thus, properly                   
               characterized as administrative expenses.  * * *  [Id.                 
               at 371.]                                                               
               The court in In re Westholt, however, held that the estate             
          was not obligated for the employment tax because the estate                 
          terminated upon the confirmation of the plan.  The court                    

Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011