Deal Price Represents Unreliable Starting Point for Fair Value Calculation

BVLaw
Court Case Digests
March 8, 2018

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in this product:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (1,194 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
8011 Offices and Clinics of Doctors of Medicine
621111 Offices of Physicians (except Mental Health Specialists)
buy/sell agreement
mergers and acquisitions (M&A), dissenting shareholder, economic damages & lost profits, noncompete agreement, appreciation, valuation date, lost revenue
Crocker v. Greater Colo. Anesthesia
2018 Colo. App. LEXIS 299
US
State Court
Colorado
Court of Appeals
Unknown (plaintiff/dissenting shareholder); unknown (defendant/company)
Davidson

Summary

Appeals court agrees with trial court that deal price does not reflect target’s fair value because price resulting from merger of medical entities compensated shareholders for agreeing to substantial future pay reduction and for making other concessions.

See Also

Crocker v. Greater Colo. Anesthesia

Full Text of Court Cases
March 8, 2018

Appeals court agrees with trial court that deal price does not reflect target’s fair value because price resulting from merger of medical entities compensated shareholders for agreeing to substantial future pay reduction and for making other concessions.

This article also appears in:
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition