Great Plains Gasification Associates, A Partnership, Transco Coal Gas Company, A Partner Other Than The Tax Matters Partner - Page 52

                                        - 52 -                                        
          acknowledged in ruling upon the partnership’s suit for rights of            
          redemption:                                                                 
                    Were we to reverse the district court and look to                 
               North Dakota law for our rule of decision Great Plains                 
               would have the right to redeem at any time up to one                   
               year after judicial sale.  N.D. Cent. Code � 32-19-18                  
               (1976).  During this period Great Plains would be                      
               entitled to the possession, rents, use, and benefit of                 
               the plant.  N.D. Cent. Code � 28-24-11 (1974). * * *                   
               [United States v. Great Plains Gasification Associates,                
               813 F.2d at 195.]                                                      
               Clearly, the 1-year redemption period, with attendant rights           
          to possess the plant and receive its profits, would have had                
          substantial value to the partnership.  The project had generated            
          significant cashflow both before and after the foreclosure sale.26          
          According to credible testimony, the partners intended to use the           
          1-year redemption period to pursue further negotiations with DOE            
          to restructure the debt; the cashflow generated during the 1-year           
          redemption period would have allowed the partnership to sweeten             
          the pot in negotiating with DOE.                                            
               Respondent speculates that, in the light of DOE’s                      
          unreceptiveness to the debt restructuring proposals put forward             
          immediately before the foreclosure sale, DOE would have also been           
          unreceptive to any further efforts to restructure the debt during           
          any redemption period.  There is simply no way of knowing,                  
          however, how DOE might have responded if the partnership had been           

               26 For the 11 months prior to the foreclosure sale, the                
          project had generated positive cashflow of about $57 million.               
          During the year after the foreclosure sale, the project generated           
          positive cashflow of about $16 million.                                     




Page:  Previous  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  53  54  55  56  57  58  59  60  61  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011