No ‘Long-Recognized Principle’ Against Use of Market Price as Fair Value Indicator, High Court Says

BVLaw
Court Case Digests
July 9, 2020

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
Already a subscriber?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (1,896 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
6719 Offices of Holding Companies, NEC
551112 Offices of Other Holding Companies
shareholder dissent/oppression
expert testimony, discounted cash flow (DCF), event study, merger price, statutory appraisal, synergy, terminal value, market value, comparable companies method, efficient market, unaffected market price
Fir Tree Value Master Fund v. Jarden Corp., (Jarden III)
2020 Del. LEXIS 237
US
State Court
Delaware
Supreme Court
Dr. Mark Zmijewski (petitioners); Dr. Glenn Hubbard (company/respondent)
Seitz

Summary

High court affirms trial court’s use of unaffected market price as fair value in statutory appraisal involving merger of publicly traded company; high court rejects petitioners’ late argument that, where sale process was flawed and company failed to prove synergies, deal price should act as floor.

See Also

Fir Tree Value Master Fund v. Jarden Corp., (Jarden III)

Full Text of Court Cases
July 9, 2020

High court affirms trial court’s use of unaffected market price as fair value in statutory appraisal involving merger of publicly traded company; high court rejects petitioners’ late argument that, where sale process was flawed and company failed to prove synergies, deal price should act as floor.