- 38 -
of PI long ago, but that in no way establishes him as an
authority about PI or the plastics industry. When Lewin was
employed by Miller and was assigned work for PI, that company was
located in New Jersey under different ownership and had not yet
manufactured any recyclers. By the time of the transactions in
issue PI had moved to Hyannis, Massachusetts. Nothing in the
record establishes that Lewin had any special knowledge about PI
or its business in 1981-82. Lewin’s knowledge of SAB Foam is
derived primarily from the memorandum and Miller.
B. Alleged Experts
Petitioner contends that Dooskin and Sacco provided the
requisite independent analysis of the investment. We disagree.
Dooskin and Sacco, neither of whom had any knowledge of the
plastics recycling industry, reviewed the memorandum for, at
most, 7 hours combined. Their only knowledge of SAB Foam came
from the memorandum (i.e., promotional material). Dooskin
testified that he informed Lewin the investment “passed muster”,
but that the economics of the investment “was dependent upon the
valuation of the equipment”. Petitioner, however, failed to
undertake the necessary due diligence and seek a thorough and
independent analysis of the value of the recyclers despite
Dooskin’s warning. We are not convinced that Dooskin’s and
Sacco’s review of the memorandum was any more than a very limited
inquiry on behalf of Lewin. Neither petitioner nor his partners
Page: Previous 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011