In Gorenstein, the Seventh Circuit found that “prejudgment interest should be presumptively available to victims of federal law violations. Without it, compensation of the plaintiff is incomplete and the defendant has an incentive to delay.” 874 F.2d at 436. The Circuit noted that there is no federal statutory interest rate on prejudgment interest, but recommended using the prime rate for prejudgment interest in such a situation. The prime rate is a “readily ascertainable figure which provides a reasonable although rough estimate of the interest rate necessary to compensate plaintiffs not only for the loss of the use of their money but also for the risk of default.” Id.
34 (line 14); p. 49 (line 24)-p. In early 1992, Schwinn and True Fitness began discussing development of a new treadmill which True Fitness would build for Schwinn. According to Lamar, Schwinn desired a treadmill which would be different from the treadmill which True Fitness was selling under its own name, since Schwinn sold the same treadmill at a price $400 to $500 greater than True Fitness. 8, p. 29 (lines 7-17).
As fitness trends shifted and technology evolved, Schwinn responded by offering a lineup of groundbreaking and affordable cardio equipment, including exercise bikes and treadmills. As the parent company of such legendary brands as Schwinn and Mongoose, Pacific Cycle delivers some of the biggest names in outdoor recreation. But it’s not just the names customer’s trust, it’s the look and feel of our products, our superior quality, and our outstanding customer service that help us bring these premium brands to the hands and feet of our customers.
685, 126 L.Ed.2d 652 (1994). “A party can argue inconsistent positions in the alternative, but once it has sold one to the court it cannot turn around and repudiate it in order to have a second victory. . . .” Id. No matter how denominated, any findings of fact contained herein or below shall operate as Findings of Fact, and any conclusions of law contained herein or below shall operate as Conclusions of Law. As of the Petition Date, Schwinn owed True Fitness $282,349.59 for treadmills and parts which Schwinn had ordered but not paid.
Mark Smith has a nice page about his Schwinn bikes , also some good Schwinn Repair and Restoration tips. Good mathematics doesn’t always help you when it schwinn ebike comes to bicycle tires. For example, most “middleweight” Schwinns take 26 x 1 3/4 tires, which are hard to find, not 26 x 1.75 as used on other brands.
As in Rafoth, the consolidation order in the related Schwinn cases did not contain a factual finding that the several Debtors constituted a single corporate operation. Additionally, § 101(31), the Code provision at issue in Rafoth defines “insider” based on the person’s relationship with the “debtor,” the same defined term used in § 547(c)(4) to describe who must benefit from alleged subsequent new value. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) and 547(c)(4). However, Mr. Lamar testified that during the Preference Period he received weekly and twice-weekly telephone calls from Mr. Stallings, the Defendant’s President. 39, p. 11 (lines 1-6); p. 13 (lines 5-10). 39, p. 12 (lines 9-25).
Second, since the Committee’s inconsistent positions have been taken in the same case, it argues that the facts at issue are the same now as in the Common Issues trial. Lastly, Defendant suggests that the Committee convinced this Court to adopt its position that the Debtors should be treated as a consolidated entity in the Common Issues trial and have reaped the benefit of that ruling in this and another Adversary proceeding it filed. Additionally, the subsequent new value must remain unpaid as of the petition date.
1014, 1020 (Bankr.N.D.Ill. 1994) (Schmetterer, J.). “The doctrine is intended to protect the courts from being manipulated by litigants who seek to prevail twice on opposite theories.” Id. Although the doctrine is usually applied to successive suits, it is not so limited. Continental Illinois Corp. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 998 F.2d 513, 518 (7th Cir. 1993), cert. Denied, 510 U.S. 1041, 114 S.Ct.
As discussed earlier, the Committee previously demonstrated in the Common Issues trial that the Debtors were insolvent during the Preference Period. In proving this element of its preference case, the Committee presented evidence to the Court reflecting that the Debtors’ liabilities exceeded their assets on a consolidated basis. Furthermore, the Defendant did not establish that the schwinn dealers individual Schwinn subsidiaries were liable for their sister corporations’ debts to the Defendant. According to Thorholm, each of the Debtors had always separately paid its own invoices received from the Defendant. Indeed, Mr. Stallings himself testified that each of the various Debtors had a different payment pattern with the Defendant. Stallings Tr., p. 42 (lines 8-23, 18-22).