BVLaw

Featured Case
Court Case Digest

In appraisal action involving sale of public company, court says sale process had “objective indicia of reliability,” justifying use of deal price for fair value determination. 

View Case Digest Download Case
Welcome to BVLaw
BVLaw is a central, fully searchable repository for the most important business valuation cases and case digests.Every day BVLaw legal experts track published decisions from the courts in all 50 U.S. states and federal jurisdictions - including the Delaware Court of Chancery and U.S. Tax Courts - guaranteeing that you (and your clients) stay current on the very latest valuation law.  Learn more and subscribe >>
Expand the following panels for additional search options.

In re Happy Child World, Inc.

In an entire-fairness-cum-statutory-appraisal case involving nonoperating day care center whose facility was leased on merger date, court approves use of capitalization of earnings and NAV models and averaging results to determine fair value; business model was uncertain on merger date, court notes.

Uncertain Business Model on Merger Date Justifies Use of Income and NAV Models, Court Says

In an entire-fairness-cum-statutory-appraisal case involving nonoperating day care center whose facility was leased on merger date, court approves use of capitalization of earnings and NAV models and averaging results to determine fair value; business model was uncertain on merger date, court notes.

Boesch v. Holeman

In dispute over value of dissociated partner’s one-third interest in whiskey business, appeals court says trial court erred in adopting value determination that applied discount for lack of control; applicable partnership law requires value be based on sale of entire business as a going concern.

Partnership Statute Precludes Use of Minority Discount in Buying Out Dissociated Partner

In dispute over value of dissociated partner’s one-third interest in whiskey business, appeals court says trial court erred in adopting value determination that applied discount for lack of control; applicable partnership law requires value be based on sale of entire business as a going concern.

Turek Enterprises, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

In business interruption case resulting from mandatory shutdowns to control COVID-19, court finds plaintiff chiropractic clinic failed to show insurer breached its policy; court says plaintiff did not demonstrate “tangible damage” to property and failed to overcome policy’s express virus exclusion.

In COVID-19 Business Interruption Case, Court Finds Business Cannot Show Insurer’s Coverage Denial Breached Contract

In business interruption case resulting from mandatory shutdowns to control COVID-19, court finds plaintiff chiropractic clinic failed to show insurer breached its policy; court says plaintiff did not demonstrate “tangible damage” to property and failed to overcome policy’s express virus exclusion.

Rochkind v. Stevenson

In a split decision featuring a long-running tort case that hinged on medical expert testimony regarding plaintiff’s claims of lead poising, divided state high court abandons two-channel approach, including Frye general acceptance test, for Daubert standard of admissibility of expert testimony.

Split Maryland High Court Adopts Daubert for Testing Admissibility of Expert Testimony

In a split decision featuring a long-running tort case that hinged on medical expert testimony regarding plaintiff’s claims of lead poising, divided state high court abandons two-channel approach, including Frye general acceptance test, for Daubert standard of admissibility of expert testimony.

Court ‘Sympathizes’ With Businesses Claiming COVID-19-Related Losses but Finds No Coverage Under Policy

In a business interruption case resulting from mandatory shutdowns to control COVID-19, court dismisses plaintiff barbershops’ claims against insurance company; plaintiffs failed to show accidental direct physical loss to premises as required for coverage and did not overcome express virus exclusion.

Diesel Barbershop, LLC v. State Farm Lloyds

In a business interruption case resulting from mandatory shutdowns to control COVID-19, court dismisses plaintiff barbershops’ claims against insurance company; plaintiffs failed to show accidental direct physical loss to premises as required for coverage and did not overcome express virus exclusion.

In re Body Transit

Court finds creditor’s interest in debtor’s property is “inconsequential” and says a valuation of debtor’s fitness club must account for dismal state of fitness industry due to COVID-19 shutdown; debtor’s projections related to reorganization plan are too optimistic given economic uncertainty.

Court Finds Valuation of Debtor Entity Must Account for COVID-19 Effect on Industry

Court finds creditor’s interest in debtor’s property is “inconsequential” and says a valuation of debtor’s fitness club must account for dismal state of fitness industry due to COVID-19 shutdown; debtor’s projections related to reorganization plan are too optimistic given economic uncertainty.

Rose’s 1, LLC v. Erie Ins. Exch.

D.C. court, ruling on parties’ motions for summary judgment, finds restaurant owners cannot show that mayor’s COVID-19-related closure orders constituted “direct physical loss” to the property, as required under the existing business interruption policy; court rules for insurer and closes case.

Court Says Restaurants Fail to Meet Requirements for COVID-19-Related Business Interruption Coverage

D.C. court, ruling on parties’ motions for summary judgment, finds restaurant owners cannot show that mayor’s COVID-19-related closure orders constituted “direct physical loss” to the property, as required under the existing business interruption policy; court rules for insurer and closes case.

Henley Mining v. Parton

In statutory appraisal case, court denies summary judgment motion arguing opposing expert’s valuation fails to meet legal definition of fair value, i.e., “the value of the company as a whole and as a going concern”; court says controlling case law does not preclude use of net asset value method.

Fair Value Standard Does Not Preclude Use of Net Asset Approach, Court Affirms

In statutory appraisal case, court denies summary judgment motion arguing opposing expert’s valuation fails to meet legal definition of fair value, i.e., “the value of the company as a whole and as a going concern”; court says controlling case law does not preclude use of net asset value method.

Raley v. Brinkman

In LLC member buyout dispute, the Court of Appeals finds the term “fair value” does not contemplate the use of shareholder-level discounts. However, tax affecting is relevant evidence when determining the going-concern value of subject S corp. Trial court must consider evidence on tax affecting.

Tennessee Appeals Court Clarifies Use of Discounts and Tax Affecting in Court-Ordered LLC Buyout

In LLC member buyout dispute, the Court of Appeals finds the term “fair value” does not contemplate the use of shareholder-level discounts. However, tax affecting is relevant evidence when determining the going-concern value of subject S corp. Trial court must consider evidence on tax affecting.

Calculating Fair Value, Court Uses Experts’ Income Analyses but Adjusts for Inconsistencies

In buyout dispute over closely held corporation, State Supreme Court upholds trial court’s value determination based on income-based analyses parties’ experts presented but adjusting for inconsistencies in each opinion; asset approach was inappropriate where company would continue to operate.

Anderson v. A & R Spraying & Trucking, Inc.

In buyout dispute over closely held corporation, State Supreme Court upholds trial court’s value determination based on income-based analyses parties’ experts presented but adjusting for inconsistencies in each opinion; asset approach was inappropriate where company would continue to operate.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Calpers Corp. Partners, LLC

In bankruptcy dispute, court rejects parties’ Daubert challenge to opposing expert testimony; defense expert did not blindly rely on management projections for capital adequacy and balance sheet tests, and plaintiff’s expert did not use hindsight to find debtor was insolvent on fund transfer dates.

Experts Need Not Be ‘Blue-Ribbon Practitioners’ to Meet Rule 702 Qualification Requirement

In bankruptcy dispute, court rejects parties’ Daubert challenge to opposing expert testimony; defense expert did not blindly rely on management projections for capital adequacy and balance sheet tests, and plaintiff’s expert did not use hindsight to find debtor was insolvent on fund transfer dates.

Gemini Ins. Co. v. Potts

In bifurcated ESOP litigation centering on ERISA violations, court finds trustee defendants’ professional liability policy expressly excluded coverage for ERISA claims; under language of policy, insurer is not required to defend or indemnify trustee defendants fighting DOL’s ERISA allegations.

Court Finds ESOP Trustee’s Insurance Excludes Coverage for Defense Against DOL’s ERISA Claims

In bifurcated ESOP litigation centering on ERISA violations, court finds trustee defendants’ professional liability policy expressly excluded coverage for ERISA claims; under language of policy, insurer is not required to defend or indemnify trustee defendants fighting DOL’s ERISA allegations.

Kruse v. Synapse Wireless, Inc.

In appraisal action arising out of controller’s buyout of minority stockholders, court finds there is no reliable market evidence as to target’s fair value on merger date; none of expert valuations are “wholly reliable,” but one expert’s DCF analysis offers a “proportionately reliable conclusion.”

1 - 25 of 7,938 results