Originally published by David Coale.
A multi-million dollar judgment, in favor of a bankruptcy trustee suing for the estate, foundered on two problems about party identity:
- Injury? The estate (LSI) had no standing to seek damages about a substantial debt incurred to an alleged insider (Jabil), because: “[T]he millions of dollars awarded under Damage Element No. 1 represent Jabil’s injury, not LSI’s. Jabil manufactured and delivered the contractually agreed upon equipment to LSI. LSI benefitted from the equipment, and Ebert even leased and sold the equipment in Chapter 11 proceedings. Moreover, LSI did not pay the invoices on the equipment. Therefore, LSI benefitted and even had cash available for other needs.” (emphasis in original)
- Benefit? Stock sales involving affiliated entities did not established a personal benefit to alleged insiders (Apfel and Bartlett): “[E]bert tacitly admits that she provided evidence only for the nominee companies’ gains, not for Appel and Bartlett in their individual capacity. Manz’s calculations were based primarily on two documents: Schedule 7.B, which showed market sales of LSI stock, and a list of nominee companies with how many shares of LSI each owned as of September 9, 2011. Yet these documents only list companies and provide no proof of or insight into Appel and Bartlett as individuals.”
Ebert v. DeJoria, No 18-10382 (April 30, 2019).
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
from Texas Bar Today http://bit.ly/2Wv3tIV
via Abogado Aly Website
No comments:
Post a Comment