Case No. 01-52840-399United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Missouri.
April 10, 2003
ORDER ON OBJECTION TO ASSUMPTION OF EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN TAK MING LIU AND DEBTOR, THERMAL DYNAMICS CORPORATION
BARRY SCHERMER, Bankruptcy Judge
This matter came before the Court upon the Debtors’ request to assume executory contracts pursuant to the confirmation of the Debtors’ First Amended and Restated Joint Plan of Reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, dated January 17, 2003, and the Objection filed by Tak Ming Liu (“Liu”) to the assumption by Debtor, Thermal Dynamics Corporation (“Thermal”), of a certain employment agreement (the “Contract”) by and between Thermal and Liu. Due and adequate notice having been given, the Court being fully apprised of the circumstances, and having considered the pleadings and the record in these proceedings, as well as the arguments and statements of counsel, the Court hereby finds as follows:
1. The Contract does not constitute an executory contract of Debtor, Thermal, and consequently has neither been assumed nor rejected by Thermal. The Court makes no findings that the Contract and the obligations of the parties have terminated.
Page 2
3. The Court makes no findings as to any other characteristics of the Contract.
Page 3
Page 4
Lloyd A. Palans Direct: 314-259-2301 lapalans@bryancave.com
April 10, 2003
VIA HAND-DELIVERY
Honorable Barry S. Schermer c/o Wynne Abernathy U.S. Bankruptcy Court Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse 111 So. 10th Street, 5th Floor St. Louis, MO 63102
Re: Thermadyne Holdings Corporation, et al., [Proposed] Order on Objection to Assumption of Employment Agreement Between Tak Ming Liu and Debtor, Thermal Dynamics Corporation
Dear Judge Schermer:
Following the hearing held last Monday, April 7, 2003 on the above matter, the Court requested that the undersigned prepare a draft order for review by opposing counsel to memorialize the Court’s ruling. We prepared such an order and circulated a copy-to opposing counsel, but have been unable to reach agreement with counsel as to the form and substance of the order to be entered.
Consequently, the parties have agreed to submit to you their respective orders proposed for entry by the Court, it being our intent that the Court may select or modify an order which is appropriate for entry.
A copy of the Debtors’ proposed order for entry is enclosed. Opposing counsel will be forwarding its proposed order for entry under separate cover.
Respectfully submitted,
Lloyd A. Palans
LAP/12b
Enclosure
cc: David M. Dare, Esq. (w/encl.) (Via Fax No. 314-965-2225)
Adam P. Foreman, Esq. (w/encl.) (Via Fax No. 617-790-0101)
Page 1