Otto Preminger Films, Ltd. v. Qintex Entertainment, Inc. (In re Qintex Entertainment, Inc.)

Good Law
950 F.2d 1492
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 20, 1991Nos. 90-56338, 90-56351California3,227 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Farris, J.

Otto Preminger Films, Ltd., Campbell-Devon Productions, Inc., and George C. Scott appeal the district court’s orders approving the sale of the entertainment assets of the debtors pursuant to § 363 of the Bankruptcy Code. 11 U.S.C. § 363 (b)(1) and (f)(1988). The question is whether the four Scott contracts and the Preminger agreement were executory. We affirm the district court ruling on the Scott contracts, but reverse and remand on the Preminger agreement.

On April 28, 1987, Preminger granted Hal Roach Studios Inc., the exclusive right to subdistribute five motion pictures and to colorize and subdistribute the colorized versions of four of the motion pictures. The subdistribution rights will terminate on June 26, 2011. Preminger retained creative control over the eolorization process. Hal Roach was obligated to colorize two of the pictures by June 26,1988, and the other two pictures by June 14, 1990.

*1494 The agreement, as modified by a letter agreement dated March 18, 1988, provided that Hal Roach was to pay Preminger $1 million dollars. Hal Roach would also pay a percentage of gross receipts to Preminger after it retained the first $2.3 million dollars of gross receipts and…

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.