Weisfelner v. Blavatnik (In re Lyondell Chem. Co.)

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
April 21, 2017

Access the Full Article

This article and its downloads are available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in these products:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (55,893 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
2911 Petroleum Refining
324110 Petroleum Refineries
bankruptcy
fraud, merger, projections, insolvency, earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization (EBITDA), debt, amortization, balance sheet, depreciation, future income
Weisfelner v. Blavatnik (In re Lyondell Chem. Co.)
2017 Bank. LEXIS 1097
US
Federal Court
Federal
United States Bankruptcy Court
CMAI, Purvin & Gurtz (industry, Trustee), Anders Maxwell, Ralph Tuliano (financial, Trustee), Thomas O’Connor, Young (industry, defendants), Christopher Kearns (solvency, defendants)
Glenn

Summary

Court says trustee fails to show debtor was insolvent under any applicable financial condition tests; contemporaneous industry analysis and valuations by financing banks belie claim that management projections in support of merger were unreasonable.
Weisfelner v. Blavatnik (In re Lyondell Chem. Co.)
PDF, Size: 1,742 KB

See Also

Trustee’s Attack on Merger Projections Fails to Resonate With Court

Court Case Digests
April 21, 2017

Court says trustee fails to show debtor was insolvent under any applicable financial condition tests; contemporaneous industry analysis and valuations by financing banks belie claim that management projections in support of merger were unreasonable.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation & Bankruptcy Compendium, Third Edition
BVR Guide to Management Projections and Business Valuation: Analysis and Case Law