Acosta v. Wilmington Trust, N.A. (II) (Graphite)

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
January 25, 2019

Access the Full Article

This article and its downloads are 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. (1,548 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
3624 Carbon and Graphite Products
327992 Ground or Treated Mineral and Earth Manufacturing
discovery
expert testimony, breach of fiduciary duty, deposition, disclosure, discovery, fair market value (FMV), overpayment, valuation report, employee stock ownership plan (ESOP), attorney-client privilege
Acosta v. Wilmington Trust, N.A.
2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12410
US
Federal Court
Ohio
United States District Court
James A. Krillenberger (plaintiff/DOL); Mark A. Rule (defendant/trustee)
Gwin

Summary

In ESOP case, court, citing Rule 26 of federal rules of civil procedure, denies defendant trustee’s motion to compel disclosure of information related to DOL expert’s prior work in valuation industry and expert’s other work for DOL on ESOP-related matters.
Acosta v. Wilmington Trust, N.A.2
PDF, Size: 100 KB

See Also

In ESOP Discovery Dispute, Court Affirms Protection of Expert Drafts Under Rule 26

Court Case Digests
January 25, 2019

In ESOP case, court, citing Rule 26 of federal rules of civil procedure, denies defendant trustee’s motion to compel disclosure of information related to DOL expert’s prior work in valuation industry and expert’s other work for DOL on ESOP-related matters.

This article also appears in:
BVR Guide to Management Projections and Business Valuation: Analysis and Case Law