Opinion ID: 2402094
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Interpretation of the Severance Agreement's Acceleration Clause

Text: [¶ 29] The severance agreement provided that PhycoGen's sale of all or substantially all of its assets in accordance with a plan of liquidation would trigger the acceleration of all outstanding payments, requiring payment in full within thirty days. Levine contends that PhycoGen's sale of its assets was pursuant to a plan of liquidation that triggered the acceleration clause. The trial court concluded, however, that even though most of the assets were sold off at minimal amounts, it was not pursuant to a plan of liquidation as contemplated by the agreement and plaintiff is not entitled to acceleration of payment. [8] [¶ 30] Whether a contract term is ambiguous is a question of law that we review de novo. Villas by the Sea Owners Ass'n v. Garrity, 2000 ME 48, ¶ 9, 748 A.2d 457, 461. If a contractual provision is unambiguous, it will be given its plain, ordinary, and generally accepted meaning. Interpretation of such a contract is a matter of law. Id. (citation omitted). [¶ 31] PhycoGen liquidated its physical assets for $18,442 prior to filing bankruptcy. The bankruptcy trustee then sold the remainder of its assets  its intellectual property  for $27,500. The language in the acceleration provision is unambiguous, and the trial court was not compelled to find that the sale of PhycoGen's physical assets by the company, and the separate sale of PhycoGen's intellectual property by the bankruptcy trustee, were in accordance with a plan of liquidation. Consequently, the court did not err in concluding that the acceleration clause had not been triggered. The entry is: Judgment affirmed.