Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Misunderstanding of Facts Results in Overvaluation of Fuel Supply Rights

Debtor’s fuel supply rights had value either in form of an implied contract, customer relationship, or simply an income stream, court says; court does not assign specific value but finds appraiser overstated its value due to misunderstanding of key facts.

Market Data Approach ‘Particularly Unsuitable’ to Valuing Feature Film

Court rejects expert’s movie valuation based on percentage of cost of making it; market data approach is “particularly unsuitable” because simply averaging price of films and cost to create them does not yield information about value of particular film.

Misunderstanding of Facts Results in Overvaluation of Fuel Supply Rights

Debtor’s fuel supply rights had value either in form of an implied contract, customer relationship, or simply an income stream, court says; court does not assign specific value but finds appraiser overstated its value due to misunderstanding of key facts.

r2 Advisors, LLC v. Equitable Oil Purchasing Co. (In re Red Eagle Oil, Inc.)

Debtor’s fuel supply rights had value either in form of an implied contract, customer relationship, or simply an income stream, court says; court does not assign specific value but finds appraiser overstated its value due to misunderstanding of key facts.

Flop film poses unique valuation challenge

A recent bankruptcy-related case in front of the California Court of Appeal raises important questions about how one quantifies the value of a dated piece of art, a film, for which there never was a market in the first place.

Holder v. Howe

Court rejects expert’s movie valuation based on percentage of cost of making it; market data approach is “particularly unsuitable” because simply averaging price of films and cost to create them does not yield information about value of particular film.

Market Data Approach ‘Particularly Unsuitable’ to Valuing Feature Film

Court rejects expert’s movie valuation based on percentage of cost of making it; market data approach is “particularly unsuitable” because simply averaging price of films and cost to create them does not yield information about value of particular film.

Daubert Flexible as to Solvency Determination for Multiple Debtor Entities

Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.

Daubert tests reliability of testimony, not power of persuasion

The plaintiff, representing the debtor enterprises, sued executives of related family-run consumer lending and retail businesses that had filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy over allegedly fraudulent transfers.

Bankruptcy Court’s Going-Concern Valuation Weathers Appeal

In Chapter 7 case, Bankruptcy Court finds trustee expert’s liquidation valuation fails to meet insolvency tests; court says expert’s substantial discounting of debtor’s assets is based on mistaken assumption and incompatible with going-concern valuation.

Bankruptcy Court’s Going-Concern Valuation Weathers Appeal

In Chapter 7 case, district court upholds Bankruptcy Court’s insolvency determination, which was a predicate to many of trustee’s claims; reviewing court says evidence supports use of going-concern valuation and rejection of liquidation discount.

Daubert Flexible as to Solvency Determination for Multiple Debtor Entities

Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.

Burtch v. Opus, LLC (In re Opus East, LLC) (II)

In Chapter 7 case, district court upholds Bankruptcy Court’s insolvency determination, which was a predicate to many of trustee’s claims; reviewing court says evidence supports use of going-concern valuation and rejection of liquidation discount.

Post-Confirmation Comm. for Small Loans, Inc. v. Martin

Court finds Daubert centers on reliability, not persuasiveness, and can accommodate experts’ different approaches to determining solvency in case with multiple debtor entities; court rejects exclusion of expert opinion relying on GAAP-based financials.

‘Reasonably Equivalent Value’ Analysis Meets FMV Standard, Court Says

On remand, Bankruptcy Court determines sale of plaintiff’s subsidiaries to defendants yielded “reasonably equivalent value” when viewed from objective creditor’s perspective, under FMV standard and without considering debtor’s subjective needs or beliefs.

In re Mercury Companies, Inc. (II)

On remand, Bankruptcy Court determines sale of plaintiff’s subsidiaries to defendants yielded “reasonably equivalent value” when viewed from objective creditor’s perspective, under FMV standard and without considering debtor’s subjective needs or beliefs.

Bankruptcy Court Accepts Rationale for Tax Affecting

In a fraudulent transfer case involving S corp, court says valuation should reflect that buyers of S corps would experience a reduction in the value of the corporations' earnings because of the need to pay personal income taxes on those earnings.

Burtch v. Opus, LLC (In re Opus East, LLC) (I)

In Chapter 7 case, Bankruptcy Court finds trustee expert’s liquidation valuation fails to meet insolvency tests; court says expert’s substantial discounting of debtor’s assets is based on mistaken assumption and incompatible with going-concern valuation.

Bank of America, N.A. v. Veluchamy (In re Veluchamy)

In a fraudulent transfer case involving S corp, court says valuation should reflect that buyers of S corps would experience a reduction in the value of the corporations' earnings because of the need to pay personal income taxes on those earnings.

Court Finds Facts Back Expert’s Value-Per-Subscriber Metric

Court finds trust failed to prove insolvency; its expert’s use of DCF alone was inappropriate where there were no cash flow projections untainted by fraud, but competing expert’s market-based approach and value per subscriber analysis were solid.

‘Reasonably Equivalent Value’ Analysis Is Not a Dollars-and-Cents Issue

For reasonably equivalent value determination, Bankruptcy Court finds contract price and values from experts’ discounted cash flow analyses are too limiting and applies totality of circumstances test, concluding stock transfer is not avoidable.

Court Admits Solvency Analysis Lacking Specific Valuation of Debtor

Court finds solvency analysis is not subject to AICPA’s valuation standards and admits expert’s claim that “magnitude of excess” reflected in adjusted balance sheet numbers means assets exceeded liabilities.

Adelphia Recovery Trust v. FPL Group, Inc. (In re Adelphia Corp.)

Court finds trust failed to prove insolvency; its expert’s use of DCF alone was inappropriate where there were no cash flow projections untainted by fraud, but competing expert’s market-based approach and value per subscriber analysis were solid.

In re Mercury Companies, Inc. (I)

For reasonably equivalent value determination, Bankruptcy Court finds contract price and values from experts’ discounted cash flow analyses are too limiting and applies totality of circumstances test, concluding stock transfer is not avoidable.

Dietz v. Jacobs

Court finds solvency analysis is not subject to AICPA’s valuation standards and admits expert’s claim that “magnitude of excess” reflected in adjusted balance sheet numbers means assets exceeded liabilities.

1 - 25 of 31 results