A sample of case digests recently added to BVLaw
Now at BVLaw:
Ritchie v. Rupe, 2011 WL 206845 (Neb. App.)(Jan. 25, 2011)
Texas Court of Appeals affirmed availability of forced buy-out remedy for shareholder oppression and held that when minority oppressed shareholder wants to sell, the fair market value standard (including discounts) is appropriate. Experts: Donald Latin, Richard Latin, and Alan Tolmas (minority shareholder) Judge: Moseley State/Jurisdiction: Texas Court: Court of Appeals T ype of case: shareholder oppression
Nuveen v. Nuveen, 2011 WL 988826 (N.D.)(March 22, 2011) Divorce court prefers BV-certified appraiser over broker for valuation of orthodontic practice, in particular his reliance on intangible asset sale three years prior to divorce.
Experts: Leonard Sliwoski (husband); Kevin Shea (wife) Judge: Kapsner State/Jurisdiction: North Dakota Court: Supreme Court Type of case: marital dissolution
Level 3 Communications v. Floyd, 2011 WL 11000078 (M.D. Tenn.)(March 22, 2011) Federal district court precludes defendant’s expert from opining on the appropriateness of legal remedy (loss of use damages vs. lost profits), but admits his testimony criticizing the plaintiff’s loss of use calculus and proposing an alternative damage amount.
Experts: Gregory Schuelke (defendant) Judge: Trauger State/Jurisdiction: federal/ Tennessee Court: U.S. District Court Type of case: tort
Gary’s Implement, Inc. v. Bridgeport Tractor Parts, 2011 WL 1198401 (Neb.)(April 1, 2011) Nebraska Supreme Court affirms admission of expert lost profits calculations that relied on comparable companies owned by defendant.
Experts: John Wenande (defendant) Judge: McCormack State/Jurisdiction: Nebraska Court: Supreme Court Type of case: breach of contract
Adams v. Adams, 2011 WL 1385570 (Mass.)(April 14, 2011) Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rejects direct capitalization method for valuing hedge fund partnership interest, finding DCF method is more appropriate, plus tax-affecting.
Experts: Gregory Cowhey (wife); David Gannett (husband) Judge: Cordy State/Jurisdiction: Mass. Court: Supreme Court Type of case: marital dissolution
Estate of Saunders v. Commissioner, 136 T.C. No. 18 (April 28, 2011) Tax Court holds that different standards apply to including an asset value in an estate and deducting the value of a liability; and further, that multiple, divergent expert assessment of contingency claims establish that their value could not be readily ascertained, as required by law.
Experts: Philip Schwab (taxpayer) and James McCann (IRS) Judge: Cohen State/Jurisdiction: federal Court: U.S. Tax Court Type of case: federal tax
Estate of Foster v. Commissioner, 2011 WL 1598633 (U.S. Tax Ct.)(April 28, 2011) Tax Court denies discount due to “hazards of litigation,” and denies deduction for contingent liability claims that could not be readily ascertained at time of death, due in part to wide disparity in appraisers’ assessment of the claims.
Experts: Linton Kotzin and David Eckstein (taxpayer); Mark Mitchell and Mark House (IRS) Judge: Cohen State/Jurisdiction: federal Court: Tax Court Type of case: federal tax
Mirror Worlds, LLC v. Apple, Inc., 2011 WL 1304488 (E.D. Tex.)(April 4, 2011) Federal district court tosses out a $208 million jury award for lack of sufficient evidence proving patent infringement and for lack of legally justified damages, including improper reliance on entire market value of accused products.
Experts: Walter Bratic (plaintiff) Judge: Davis State/Jurisdiction: federal/Texas Court: U.S. District Court Type of case: IP