Yaquinto v. Thompson St. Capital Partners (In re Stone Panels, Inc.)
Trustee argued that a cash transfer by debtor was a constructively fraudulent transfer under the bankruptcy code. The Trustee was able to show that the transaction was an interest in property for which debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value. The Trustee was not able to show that the debtor was insolvent at the date of the transfer or became insolvent as a result of the transfer. The debtor was engaged in a business for which the property remaining was sufficiently capitalized. It appeared that the debtor would have sufficient access to cash to service its obligations and operate its business in a sustainable way. The Trustee failed in its burden of proof.
Property Transfer Was Not Fraudulent Because Debtor Was Not Insolvent
Trustee argued that a cash transfer by debtor was a constructively fraudulent transfer under the bankruptcy code. The Trustee was able to show that the transaction was an interest in property for which debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value. The Trustee was not able to show that the debtor was insolvent at the date of the transfer or became insolvent as a result of the transfer. The debtor was engaged in a business for which the property remaining was sufficiently capitalized. It appeared that the debtor would have sufficient access to cash to service its obligations and operate its business in a sustainable way. The Trustee failed in its burden of proof.
‘Friends and Family’ Gifts of Private Stock Support 50% DLOM
Court considers whether family gifts of closely held stock were “arm's length,” sufficient to support 50% discounts.
Huber v. Commissioner
Court considers whether family gifts of closely-held stock were “arms length,” sufficient to support 50% discounts ...
Estate of Curry v. U.S.
At issue are the valuation of stock in a wood veneer manufacturer for federal estate tax purposes and the government's claim that the court refused to instruct the jury about matters concerning voting and non-voting control.
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp.
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp. Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp., 318 F. Supp. 1116, 166 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 235 (S.D.N.Y. 1970) OPINION: TENNEY, District Judge. By opinion dated October 26, 1956, entered in an action by Georgia-Pacific Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "GP") for a declaratory judgment of invalidity and non-infringement of three patents held by United States Plywood Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "USP") and upon a counterclaim by USP ...