formation of BFLP evidenced a far greater degree of skepticism.
of BFLP offered no additional creditor protection is its view that Mr.
172) After finding that the formation of BFLP did not satisfy the
determine whether BFLP would ever do anything other than hold the WCB
However, the court stated that the subsequent transfer of WBC units to BFLP did not meet that exception.
It cited the facts that BFLP never (1) engaged in businesslike transactions, either before or after the decedent contributed his interest and (2) attempted to diversify its assets, as evidence that the transfer resulted in a mere "recycling of the value.
Because BFLP could not transform its sole asset (the WBC class B membership units) into a liquid asset without a redemption, the court stated that the decedent, by not ordering any redemptions, exercised "practical control over BFLP and limited its function to simply holding tide to the class B membership units.