bankruptcycourts/bankruptcybasics/ ehap-terll.html (as visited June 18, 2008, and available in Clerk of Court’s case file). Accord, In re Hechinger Inv. Co. of Del., 254 B.R. 306, 320 (Bkrtcy.D.Del.2000) (noting it may run “a year or two”). And a firm (or its assets) may have more value (say, as a going concern) where sale takes place quickly. As the District Court in this case acknowledged, “there are times when it is more advantageous for the debt- or to begin to sell as many assets as quickly as possible in order to insure that the assets do not lose value.” In re Piccadilly Cafeterias, Inc., 379 B.R. 215, 224 (S.D.Fla.2006) (internal quotations marks and alteration omitted). See, e.g., In re Webster Classic Auctions, Inc., 318 B.R. 216, 219 (Bkrtcy.M.D.Fla.2004) (<HOLDING>); In re Medical Software Solutions, 286 B.R.
holding confirmation vested property in the debtor and therefore properly of the estate was not liable for postconfirmation taxes incurred by debtor holding appeal not moot when court could order debtor to return to the estate postconfirmation distributions of pension plan assets holding that a plan must be amended to provide for payment of a priority tax claim proof of which was timely filed postconfirmation to conform with 11 usc  1322a2 recognizing the inestimable benefit to a chapter 11 estate to sell a piece of property at the most opportune time  whether pre or postconfirmation  as opposed to requiring all concerned to wait for a postconfirmation sale in order to receive the tax relief congress obviously intended holding after comprehensive analysis that the postconfirmation dismissal of a chapter 11 case does not vacate the order of confirmation or revoke the debtors discharge