ADVANCED ISSUES IN AVOIDANCE

sufficient to survive summary judgment, despite being ruled a '"self-serving declaration [which] provided no foundation establishing his personal knowledge or experience in the industry"' by the lower court. In re Kaypro, 218 F.3d at 1075.

*

Testimony of current and former general managers of one of "sixteen radio stations" owned by defendant. In re Bee Furniture Co, Inc., 250 B.R. 757.

*

Significant evidence of payment standards in the pulp industry for other customers provided through employees with "extensive experience in the paper industry" sufficient for Bankruptcy Court to find transfers consistent with ordinary business terms. In re Global Tissue L.L.C.,106 F. Appx. At 104.

Some courts, however, appear to require independent, expert testimony of standard business terms in the applicable industry for the defendant to prove objective ordinariness. The expertise that courts have relied upon to find that the defendant has met its burden of proof under § 547(c)(2)(C) include the following:

*

Project manager of defendant's competitor with eighteen years experience in the industry qualified to testify as to industry standards. Cunnngham v. T&R Demolition, Inc. (In re ML & Assoc., Inc.), 301 B.R. 195, 206 (Bankr. N.D. Tex. 2003).

*

Expert's analysis of "ordinary business terms in the utility industry based on a 'weighted day' calculation" sufficient to assist the Court in analyzing ordinary business terms. In re Shalom Hospitality Inc., 293 B.R. at 216.

*

Expert with no connection to defendant whose opinion was offered "as to the experience of payment for orders in the green coffee industry" sufficient to prove industry standards. In re Bros. Gourmet Coffees, Inc., 271 B.R. at 462.