Airlines, 146 B.R. at 526-27). Under the Bildisco “reasonable value of services” standard, there is a presumption that the contract terms and rate represent the reasonable value of the services or goods provided under the contract. Smurfit-Stone, 425 B.R. at 741 (citing In re Bethlehem Steel Corp., 291 B.R. 260, 264 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.2003) (“There is an initial assumption that, where a contract exists, the contractual rate is the reason able value of the goods or services provided to the estate.”))- This presumption can be overcome if the objecting party provides “ ‘convincing evidence to the contrary.’” Smurfit-Stone, 425 B.R. at 741 (quoting In re Washington-St. Tammany Electric Cooperative, Inc., 111 B.R. 555, 559 (Bankr.E.D.La.1989)); but see Bernard Technologies, 342 B.R. at 177-78 (<HOLDING>). B. Analysis of Motion 1. Objectors Overcame
holding that the terms of an employment contract are not entitled to presumptive reasonableness where the contract was ultimately rejected holding a deviation from the terms of a contract constitutes an impairment of contract holding that for a suit to be brought in the venue in which the contract was to be performed the contract must expressly state where the performance of the contract was to occur recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract recognizing that courts will not add terms to a contract about which the contract is silent