Wee v. Yangzhou Putian Shoemaking Co. (In re Unimex Corp.)

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
May 13, 2024
5139 Footwear
424340 Footwear Merchant Wholesalers
bankruptcy
discount, going concern, liquidation, rule 702, solvency, insolvency, federal rules of evidence (FRE), inventory, balance sheet, debtor

Wee v. Yangzhou Putian Shoemaking Co. (In re Unimex Corp.)
2024 Bankr. LEXIS 1134; 2024 WL 2141540
US
Federal Court
Virginia
United States Bankruptcy Court
Charles H. Stryker, CFA
Brian F. Kenney

Summary

An expert’s report on debtor’s insolvency was excluded under Fed. R. Evid. 702 because the expert’s 50% discount of inventory value was a flawed assumption given that the debtor was not being liquidated and was not on its deathbed, but instead was a going concern.
Wee v. Yangzhou Putian Shoemaking Co.
PDF, Size: 359 KB

See Also

Expert’s Testimony Is Excluded as to Solvency—Adjustments to the Balance Sheet of Debtor Were Inappropriate

An expert’s report on debtor’s insolvency was excluded under Fed. R. Evid. 702 because the expert’s 50% discount of inventory value was a flawed assumption given that the debtor was not being liquidated and was not on its deathbed, but instead was a going concern.