- 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