07252017Headline:

Tampa, Florida

HomeFloridaTampa

Email Tom Young Tom Young on LinkedIn Tom Young on Twitter Tom Young on Facebook Tom Young on Avvo
Tom Young
Tom Young
Attorney • (813) 251-9706

BP Business Economic Loss Claim Appeal 2017-619: Start-Up Claimant’s Asset Purchase Does Not Allow It to “Bootstrap” Onto Predecessor’s Operating History

0 comments
The following is an Appeal Panel Decision issued pursuant to Section 6 of the BP Deepwater Horizon Economic & Property Damages Settlement Agreement and the Rules Governing the BP Appeals Process. Links may have been added to assist the reader. The original decision may be found here, as well as a glossary of BP Settlement terms

Claimant failed causation. Claimant contends that it should have been classified as a general BEL claim rather than as a Start-Up claim. Claimant argues that it would have satisfied causation as a general BEL claimant. Claimant incorporated in April 2009. It then purchased assets of a company providing similar services. Claimant kept the name of the predecessor company, kept the previous owner on as a consultant, and operated out of the same address as the predecessor.
Notwithstanding these actions, the District Court has ruled in similar appeals that an asset purchase does not allow the Claimant to boot strap on to the predecessor’s
operating history. Consequently, in light of the fact that Claimant did not exist for more than 18 months before the Spill, the Program’s classification of Claimant as a Start-Up business was correct. Thus, the denial of this Claim is upheld.

Leave a Comment

Have an opinion? Please leave a comment using the box below.

For information on acceptable commenting practices, please visit Lifehacker's guide to weblog comments. Comments containing spam or profanity will be filtered or deleted.