Holber v. M&T Bank (In re Scheffler)

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
June 5, 2012
2752 Commercial Printing, Lithographic
bankruptcy

Holber v. M&T Bank (In re Scheffler)
2012 Bankr. LEXIS 2568
US
Federal Court
Federal
United States Bankruptcy Court
David Weinberg (trustee); Damon Neagle (defendant)
Fehling

Summary

In fraudulent conveyance suit, federal bankruptcy court rejects cost approach and “hypothetical capitalization of income approach” to value a unique technology that nevertheless never made any profit in the history of the debtor’s business.
Holber v. M&T Bank (In re Scheffler)
PDF, Size: 2,797 KB

See Also

Cost Method ‘Strikingly Inappropriate’ to Value Technology

In fraudulent conveyance suit, federal bankruptcy court rejects cost approach and “hypothetical capitalization of income approach” to value a unique technology that nevertheless never made any profit in the history of the debtor’s business.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation & Bankruptcy Compendium