Huntsman disclosed yesterday, September 12th, that it had received word the night before that its valuation firm, American Appraisal, which Huntsman describes as a "leading valuation firm," is prepared to issue a written opinion that a combined Hexion/Huntsman would be solvent. Huntsman's counsel retained American Appraisal as a consultant on July 14, 2008 (that arguably maintains their advice prior to their designation as an expert as confidential attorney work product); Huntsman requested a solvency opinion of the firm on September 5.
Hexion appears to have been a bit flummoxed by the announcement, issuing a short press release later yesterday stating: "From the public filing made by Huntsman this morning, it is clear Huntsman does not have a solvency certificate. We note the peculiar timing of the announcement in view of Huntsman's request for an expedited trial and the fact that the firm they reference was retained two months ago."
It's hard to see how this development doesn't take the solvency issue out of the case, at least for now. I closed my post of August 4 noting that Vice Chancellor Lamb could very well conclude that the solvency question is not ripe unless and until Credit Suisse and Deutsche Bank refuse to fund on the grounds of the parties' failure to delivery satisfactory certification of the combined firm's solvency. This recent development should only confirm that the issue is not ripe for decision.
That leaves the MAC issue as the central issue in the case, which, given the Chancery Court's natural reluctance to invite challenges over MAC issues, put additional pressure on Hexion to clearly make out its case.
For my previous commentary on this case, see my posts of September 5, August 4, and June 28.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
Great write-up. This has been a very interesting case, I wish there were more details to read.
Post a Comment