In re South Beach Securities, Inc.

Decision Date24 July 2009
Docket NumberNo. 08 C 1136.,Bankruptcy Case No. 05 B 16679.,No. 08 C 1135.,08 C 1135.,08 C 1136.
Citation421 B.R. 456
PartiesIn re SOUTH BEACH SECURITIES, INC. Appeals of: South Beach Securities, Inc., Debtor, Scattered Corporation, Creditor.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois

Louis David Bernstein, The Bernstein Law Firm, LLC, Colleen E. McManus, Much Shelist Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, PC, Chicago, IL, for Appellant.

Cameron M. Gulden, Mary Gretchen Silver, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the United States Trustee, Chicago, IL, for Appellee.

South Beach Securities, Inc., Chicago, IL, Pro se.

Jonathan Todd Mann, Law Offices of Jonathan T. Mann, Chicago, IL, for Debtor.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

JOAN HUMPHREY LEFKOW, District Judge.

This case arises from two appeals from an order of the bankruptcy court denying confirmation of a plan of reorganization under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 1101 et seq., and the subsequent judgment of dismissal entered January 2, 2008 (B.Dkt. No. 173).1 South Beach Securities, Inc. ("South Beach"), and its sole creditor, Scattered, Inc. ("Scattered"), seek reversal and remand for entry of an order confirming the plan. The United States Trustee is the sole responding party.

The following summary of the underlying facts, which appear to be undisputed, is based on the parties' briefs (Dkt.Nos. 14, 28) and the November 1, 2007 memorandum opinion of the Honorable A. Benjamin Goldgar, the bankruptcy judge assigned to this case (Dkt.130) (hereinafter, "Goldgar Op.").

I. Facts

South Beach was once registered as a securities broker/dealer with the SEC, but at all relevant times it had no employees and no assets of alleged value other than $3.2 million in net operating losses ("NOLs"). There was, indeed, scant evidence that South Beach had ever actually done business, and the provenance of the NOLs "was not explained." Goldgar Op. at 4. South Beach's sole officer/director is named William Johnson, who receives no compensation and has had no known participation in the affairs of South Beach.

South Beach is wholly owned by NOLA, LLC. NOLA has never had any business operations. NOLA's members are Leon Greenblatt II, James Nichols, and Robert Jahelka. NOLA's only asset is the stock of South Beach. Teletech Systems, Inc. ("Teletech"), manages NOLA. Teletech's president at relevant times was Leon Greenblatt III ("Greenblatt"). Teletech receives no compensation for managing NOLA and Greenblatt receives no compensation from Teletech.

In January, 2001, Greenblatt arranged with Loop Corporation for South Beach to borrow $2.1 million to be used as capital and repaid over 5 years.2 Greenblatt testified at the confirmation hearing that he "participated in the funding of" the loan. Goldgar Op. at 5. South Beach thereafter lent to NOLA $3.2 million for the purpose of purchasing the stock of Heath Risk Management, Inc. ("HRM"). In December, 2002, Loop assigned its ($2.1 million) interest in the South Beach loan agreement to Scattered in exchange for $100,000. This made Scattered a creditor of South Beach. Scattered's officers and directors are Greenblatt, Jahelka and Nichols.

South Beach, Scattered, NOLA, and Teletech all use the address of 330 South Wells Street, Chicago Illinois.

On April 27, 2005, South Beach and NOLA filed voluntary petitions under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. South Beach's schedules reflected no assets of any kind except the HRM stock with a value of $0.3 They disclosed Scattered as the only creditor, with an unsecured claim of $3.2 million. Greenblatt signed the filed documents on behalf of South Beach.

The bankruptcy court dismissed both petitions as having been filed in bad faith, contrary to § 1112(b). South Beach appealed. The district court reversed the dismissal and remanded for further proceedings (B.Dkt. No. 52). The case was reopened and South Beach filed a plan of reorganization on September 21, 2006 (B.Dkt. No. 83). The plan established two classes of creditors. Class 1 was "general unsecured claims." It had one member, Scattered. Class 2 was "holders of [equity] interests" but identified no members. The bankruptcy court, however, determined that NOLA, as holder of all of the stock of South Beach, was a class 2 member. The plan stated that both classes were impaired.

Under the plan, the interests of Class 2 creditors were to be cancelled. South Beach would then issue 1,000 shares of common stock, and the class 1 creditor was to receive these shares in satisfaction of its $3.2 million claim. South Beach would then be discharged. "Put simply," the bankruptcy court stated, "in exchange for relinquishing its large but worthless claim against South Beach, Scattered will become the new owner of South Beach, replacing NOLA." Goldgar Op. at 7. In a memorandum filed August 3, 2005, South Beach and NOLA represented, in reference to the initially proposed plan,

The value of South Beach's NOLs can only be preserved for the benefit of creditors through a plan of reorganization. Outside of bankruptcy, NOLs are often lost when a company is sold, because the sale results in a change of ownership of more than 50%. The Internal Revenue Code has an exception, however, which allows the preservation of NOLs where ownership is transferred to creditors under a chapter 11 plan. Therefore, the only means by which Scattered can recover the NOLs is through the plan. The draft plan preserves the benefit of the NOLs for the Reorganized South Beach and its equity holder.

Consol. Mem. of NOLA and South Beach Regarding the Good Faith Filing Requirement at 4 (internal citations omitted) (B.Dkt. No. 30). That document made no reference to threatened litigation. The disclosure statement recited that "the sole asset of any value of the Debtor was a net operating loss ("NOL") carryovers [sic] for U.S. federal income tax purposes, pursuant to section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code." Disclosure Statement at 1 (B.Dkt. No. 89). The disclosure statement represented without explanation that South Beach waived its $3.2 million claim against NOLA for purposes of this bankruptcy case.

Scattered voted in favor of the plan. The Trustee objected to confirmation arguing that the plan could not be confirmed because no non-insider impaired class had voted in favor of the plan as required by § 1129(a)(10) and because its principal purpose was to avoid taxes in violation of § 1129(d).

The bankruptcy court held an evidentiary hearing. At the hearing, Greenblatt denied that Scattered, of which he was president, was an insider of South Beach, with which he had no formal relationship. He testified that Scattered would make a sufficient capital contribution to South Beach in order for South Beach to have income sufficient for the net operating losses to be offset against. He denied, however, that the plan's purpose was to avoid taxes. Rather, it was to avoid litigation with creditors of NOLA and Scattered.

The bankruptcy court determined that, under governing law, South Beach had failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Scattered is not an insider as defined at § 101(31)(B)(iii). The court made elaborate findings about the interrelationships among South Beach, NOLA, Scattered, Teletech, and Greenblatt, including that the members of NOLA included Greenblatt's father, that NOLA, although it had no business operations, assets, or property other than stock, was "managed" without compensation by Teletech, of which Greenblatt was the unpaid president and sole employee. The court stated,

The evidence .... tended to show that Scattered does control South Beach. Scattered and South Beach have the same 330 South Wells Street, Chicago address. Greenblatt is an officer and director of Scattered and is also the sole officer and employee of the manager of South Beach's parent, NOLA. Greenblatt has acted for South Beach as its "authorized person," signing the loan agreement with Loop, and has also acted for Scattered, signing the loan assignment from Loop.

In South Beach's bankruptcy, particularly, Scattered appears to have orchestrated events through its officer, Greenblatt. Although Greenblatt has no formal position with South Beach, he signed its petition and schedules, as well as each of South Beach's monthly operating reports. Greenblatt was the sole witness who testified for South Beach at the confirmation hearing; the company's only officer—a mere placeholder—did not appear, and at the Rule 2004 examination Greenblatt professed not even to know where he lives. Greenblatt helped formulate the South Beach plan. Scattered' and South Beach together proposed the plan, and Scattered prepared South Beach's tax returns to ensure the plan could be confirmed.

Goldgar Op. at 14-15 (record citations omitted). The court rejected as incredible Greenblatt's "bald denial of control." Id. at 14.

Alternatively, the bankruptcy court found that, even if Scattered did not qualify as a person in control of the debtor under § 101(31)(B)(iii), because the list of insiders is non-exclusive, citing, inter alia, In re Krehl, 86 F.3d 737, 741 (7th Cir. 1996), Scattered was an insider because it had a "`a sufficiently close relationship with the debtor that his conduct is made subject to closer scrutiny than those dealing at arm's length with the debtor.'"4 See Goldgar Op. at 15 (quoting Krehl, 86 F.3d at 741) (quoting legislative history). The bankruptcy court concluded that "all the evidence [ ] suggested that Scattered is indeed South Beach's insider." Id. at 16. It explained,

As the sole employed and officer of the limited liability company that manages South Beach's parent, Greenblatt directs the affairs of South Beach, executing its bankruptcy petition and schedules, filing its monthly operating reports, and signing the loan agreement with Loop. At the same time, however, Greenblatt is an officer and director of Scattered and acts for Scattered, executing the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • In Re South Beach Securities Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit
    • May 19, 2010
  • In re Elk Grove Vill. Petroleum, LLC
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • December 15, 2016
    ... ... v. Illinois Bell Tel. Co. ( In re Pers. Comp. Network, Inc. ), 97 B.R. 909, 912 (N.D. Ill. 1989). All parties have consented to this ... 800, 816, 108 S.Ct. 2166, 100 L.Ed.2d 811 (1988) ; In re S. Beach Sec., Inc. , 376 B.R. 881, 888 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2007) (Goldgar, J.), ... ...
  • In re 401 Props. Ltd., Bankr. No. 14-44983
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • August 4, 2016
    ... ... the continued use of cash collateral and required 401 Properties, Inc. to file a plan and disclosure statement on or before July 20, 2016. See ... Legacy Re and Rock Solid by assigning via settlement with 330 South Wells LLC only $200,000 and certain litigation proceeds. Legacy Re and ... See Judge Virginia Kendall's ruling in Wachovia Page 6 Securities , LLC v ... Jahelka , 586 F.Supp.2d 972, 981 (N.D. Ill. 2008) (aff'd, 674 ... Page 13 In In re South Beach Securities , Inc ... a debtor controlled by Leon Greenblatt tried to have a ... ...
  • In re 401 Props. Ltd., Bankr. No. 14-44983
    • United States
    • U.S. Bankruptcy Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • August 10, 2016
    ... ... the continued use of cash collateral and required 401 Properties, Inc. to file a plan and disclosure statement on or before July 20, 2016. See ... Legacy Re and Rock Solid by assigning via settlement with 330 South Wells LLC only $200,000 and certain litigation proceeds. Legacy Re and ... 79. See Judge Virginia Kendall's ruling in Wachovia Securities , LLC v ... Jahelka , 586 F.Supp.2d 972, 981 (N.D. Ill. 2008) (aff'd, 674 ... In In re South Beach Securities , Inc ... a debtor controlled by Leon Greenblatt tried to have a ... ...
1 books & journal articles
  • Dismissal of tax-driven bankruptcy plan affirmed.
    • United States
    • The Tax Adviser Vol. 41 No. 8, August 2010
    • August 1, 2010
    ...the bankruptcy court's decision to a district court, which affirmed the bankruptcy court's decision (In re South Beach Securities, Inc., 421 B.R. 456 (N.D. Ill. 2009)). South Beach then appealed the case to the Seventh Seventh Circuit's Opinion The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district cour......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT