999, a Corporation, Plaintiff/appellee/cross-Appellant v. C.I.T. Corporation, a Corporation, Defendant/appellant/cross-Appellee

Bad Law
776 F.2d 866·3 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 923·1985 U.S. App. LEXIS 24036
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 18, 198584-6561, 85-6562California3,829 words

Opinion

Opinion

Beezer, J.

999, a Nevada corporation with its principal place of business in California, brought this diversity of citizenship suit against C.I.T. Corporation (“CIT”), alleging breach of an agreement to provide financing to 999, resulting in the loss of an opportunity to acquire Bee Cee, a Missouri corporation. CIT appeals from a verdict in favor of 999, and 999 filed a cross-appeal to challenge a remittitur of damages. We affirm.

I

BACKGROUND

In 1982, 999, a holding corporation, decided to acquire Bee Cee, a manufacturer of windows and doors, which was in serious financial trouble. The plan was to use Bee Cee as a “captive buyer” to manufacture finished windows and doors from aluminum frames processed by another 999 subsidiary.

999 signed a management contract in January, 1982 taking control of Bee Cee’s operations and agreeing to purchase the corporation’s stock. To maintain Bee Cee in operation pending conclusion of the acquisition, 999 obtained accomodations with Bee Cee’s creditors, including its major suppliers and lenders, by agreeing to guarantees of Bee Cee debt. Unsecured creditors were offered payment of 30 percent in satisfaction of those debts.

Bank of America, 999’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.