Book Value, Not Market Value, Determines Essential Reliance Damages

Business Valuation UpdateVol. 11 No. 10
Legal and Court Case Update
October 2005

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. (437 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
6036 Savings institutions, Not Federally Chartered
522120 Savings Institutions
winstar
damages, breach of contract, book value, market value
American Capital Corporation v. United States
2006 U.S. Claims LEXIS 150
May 31, 2005
US
Federal Court
Federal
United States Court of Federal Claims
Andrew Charles Gilbert, Charles J. Cooper, Hamish P. M. Hume, Jane M. E. Peterson, Jeffrey Hughes, Jeffrey T. Infelise, Michael W. Kirk, Vincent J. Colatriano, William F. Ryan
Prof. Randall S. Kroszner (for United States)
Braden

Summary

In this extensive case, one of the myriad issues was whether Transcapital Financial Corporation’s essential reliance interest should be determined by book value or market value.

See Also

American Capital Corporation v. United States

Full Text of Court Cases
May 31, 2005

In this extensive case arising from the enactment of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act, Pub. L. No. 101-73, 103 Stat. 183 (1989) (FIRREA) in response to the savings and loan crisis of the 80's, involving a breach of contract ...