Sample new cases added to BVLaw in the last few weeks

Here’s a partial listing of digests and court documents added to the exclusive BVLaw database in the past few weeks.   BVLaw reviews the hundreds of cases each month—in damages, family law, Tax Court, the Delaware Chancery and other commercial courts, and elsewhere—to analyze those decisions which depended on business valuation or financial analysis in their conclusions.

Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2500 (Jan. 9, 2012)

Court sends plaintiff’s expert back for a third try at apportioning infringement damages between patented and unpatented features of technology system (Android), on a claim-by-claim basis.

Experts: Dr. Iain M. Cockburn (plaintiff)

Judge:  Alsup

State/Jurisdiction: federal/ California

Court: U.S. District Court

Type of case:  IP

SIC code and industry: 7372 Prepackaged Software (software publishing)

Okun v. Morton, 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 201 (Jan. 11, 2012)

Court affirms value of Hard Rock Cafe IP assets based on testimony by the brand’s owner/entrepreneur rather than his two IP experts.

Experts: Christian Tregellis and Scott Phillips (defendant)

Judge:  Boren

State/Jurisdiction: California

Court: Court of Appeals

Type of case:  IP

SIC code: 7011 Hotels and Motels

Powell v. The Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 2011 Fed. Cir. LEXIS XXXX (Nov. 14, 2011)


Federal Circuit confirms that neither the infringer’s profits nor the patentee’s expected lost profits serves to cap reasonable royalty damages.

Experts: unnamed

Judge:  Prost

State/Jurisdiction: federal

Court: Federal Circuit

Type of case:  IP

SIC code: 5211 Lumber and Other Building Materials Dealers

In re Marriage of Hanscam, 2011 Ore. App. LEXIS 1664 (Dec. 14, 2011)

Court affirms reliance on income approach to value solo CPA practice, including distinction between personal and enterprise goodwill, but rejects trial court’s finding that 25% of the firm was the husband’s separate property, based on his demonstrated intent to have it become marital property.

Experts: unnamed

Judge:  Duncan

State/Jurisdiction: Oregon

Court: Court of Appeals

Type of case:  marital dissolution

SIC code: 8721 Accounting, Auditing, and Bookkeeping Services (other accounting services)

Caveney v. Caveny, 2012 Mass. App. LEXIS 32 (Jan. 12, 2012)

Massachusetts Court of Appeals confirms that the fair value standard in divorce cases precludes application of any discount, either for lack of marketability or lack of control, for any closely held company, even highly restricted shares in family owned businesses.

Experts:  Steven B Boyles (wife); Bernard L. Caniff Jr. (husband).

Judge:  Graham

State/Jurisdiction: Mass.

Court: Court of Appeals

Type of case: marital dissolution

SIC code and industry: 1521 General Contractors-Single-Family Houses

Marshall Naify Revocable Trust v. United States, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2925 (Feb. 15, 2012)

Ninth Circuit confirms that post-death events are relevant when valuing a disputed or contingent claim against an estate; subsequent events are irrelevant only when the claim is certain and enforceable.

Experts: unnamed

Judge:  Alarcon

State/Jurisdiction:   federal

Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Type of case:  federal tax

SIC code and industry: 6733 Trusts, Except Educational, Religious, and Charitable

Development Specialists, Inc. v. Weiser Realty Advisors LLC, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8666 (Jan. 24, 2012)

In a malpractice action against a real estate appraiser, district court excludes valuation of leasehold interest by plaintiff’s financial expert for failing to comply with any professional standards, and for unreliability under Daubert.

Experts: Enid Hoffman (plaintiff); Duff and Phelps (defendants)

Judge:  Forrest

State/Jurisdiction: New York/ federal

Court: U.S. District Court

Type of case:  malpractice (appraiser)

SIC code and industry: 8111 Legal Services

Flying J, Inc. v. Dep’t of Transportation, 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 392 (Jan. 19, 2012)

California Court of Appeals permits lost profits for breach of contracts to convey real estate, but finds the plaintiff failed to prove the same with reasonable certainty in this case by relying on other developed locations that were not sufficiently comparable.

Experts: James Pampinella and Forrest Sandusky Baker Jr. (plaintiff)

Judge:  Dawson

State/Jurisdiction:  California

Court: Court of Appeals

Type of case:  breach of contract

SIC code and industry: 5541 Gasoline Service Stations