This appeal in a California court involved a dispute over an appraisal of the plaintiffs’ 15% interest in a grocery store the defendant operated. The plaintiffs alleged that the award of the superior court was obtained by fraud and that the arbitrator prejudiced their rights.
View Case Digest View Case
Aureus Holdings, LLC v. Kubient, Inc.
In this civil action, the defendant/counterclaim plaintiff (Kubient) filed a partial motion to dismiss the claims of unjust enrichment and tortious interference with business relations by the plaintiff/counterdefendant (Lo70s). The complaint showed that Kubient took actions not covered in the LOI, such as taking without permission the business and assets of Lo70s and persuading specific customers away from Lo70s and to Kubient. As a result of this and other actions of Kubient, the court did not allow a dismissal at this point in the process. The motions were denied.
Court Denies a Partial Motion by Defendant to Dismiss Claims of Unjust Enrichment and Tortious Interference With Business Relations
In this civil action, the defendant/counterclaim plaintiff (Kubient) filed a partial motion to dismiss the claims of unjust enrichment and tortious interference with business relations by the plaintiff/counterdefendant (Lo70s). The complaint showed that Kubient took actions not covered in the LOI, such as taking without permission the business and assets of Lo70s and persuading specific customers away from Lo70s and to Kubient. As a result of this and other actions of Kubient, the court did not allow a dismissal at this point in the process. The motions were denied.
Cela v. Cela
The Appellate Court (AC) upheld the trial court’s decision to accept the value under the income approach adjusted for the exclusion of personal goodwill. The expert for the wife (business owner) had used the asset approach reasoning that all goodwill was personal. The trial court and the AC rejected that approach.
Appellate Court Upholds Decision to Use Income Approach and Reduce Personal Goodwill
The Appellate Court (AC) upheld the trial court’s decision to accept the value under the income approach adjusted for the exclusion of personal goodwill. The expert for the wife (business owner) had used the asset approach reasoning that all goodwill was personal. The trial court and the AC rejected that approach.
Strougo v. Tivity Health, Inc.
In this case regarding alleged fraud in the purchase or sale of securities, the defendants pled a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims. The parties categorized the defendants’ alleged misstatements into two groups: (1) the Nutrisystem claim, where the defendants allegedly misled investors as to the success of the Nutrisystem acquisition; and (2) the goodwill claim, where the defendants allegedly impaired goodwill by carrying goodwill at a value that exceeded its implied fair value. The court denied the motion to dismiss.
Court Denies a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Claims That Defendants “Hid” Losses and Impaired Goodwill
In this case regarding alleged fraud in the purchase or sale of securities, the defendants pled a motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims. The parties categorized the defendants’ alleged misstatements into two groups: (1) the Nutrisystem claim, where the defendants allegedly misled investors as to the success of the Nutrisystem acquisition; and (2) the goodwill claim, where the defendants allegedly impaired goodwill by carrying goodwill at a value that exceeded its implied fair value. The court denied the motion to dismiss.
Kakollu v. Vadlamudi
In this marital dissolution case, the Indiana Appellate Court affirms the trial court’s decision that no DLOM is allowed in the valuation of a control interest. The husband’s expert failed to provide sufficient evidence that a DLOM was appropriate at the level the wife’s expert claimed. The court also affirmed the decision that $50,000 of legal and expert fees the husband paid in advance is not part of the marital estate and thus not subject to offset.
Court Affirms No DLOM in Valuation of a Control Interest, Wife’s Legal Fees Are Not Part of Marital Estate
In this marital dissolution case, the Indiana Appellate Court affirms the trial court’s decision that no DLOM is allowed in the valuation of a control interest. The husband’s expert failed to provide sufficient evidence that a DLOM was appropriate at the level the wife’s expert claimed. The court also affirmed the decision that $50,000 of legal and expert fees the husband paid in advance is not part of the marital estate and thus not subject to offset.
Cont'l Investors Fund LLC v. TradingScreen Inc.
The defendant did not breach its redemption agreement because a committee of directors, “properly engaged in the judgment-laden task of determining the amount of funds that the company could use for redemptions … [and] determined that using a greater amount of cash to redeem more shares threatened the company's ability to continue as a going concern.” As a result, interest on the asserted obligation back to 2013 was not allowed at 13%, the amount per the agreement.
Company Did Not Breach Its Redemption Agreement Because of Diligence of Directors
The defendant did not breach its redemption agreement because a committee of directors, “properly engaged in the judgment-laden task of determining the amount of funds that the company could use for redemptions … [and] determined that using a greater amount of cash to redeem more shares threatened the company's ability to continue as a going concern.” As a result, interest on the asserted obligation back to 2013 was not allowed at 13%, the amount per the agreement.
Iowa Supreme Court Allows Reduction in Value for Transaction Costs but Refuses to Allow a Reduction for Built-In Capital Gains Tax
This case was decided, on appeal, under the Iowa “election-to-purchase-in-lieu-of-dissolution statute.” The Iowa Supreme Court decided that, because the parties’ experts had “both included transaction costs in their valuations under a net asset approach, the district court’s failure to reduce the asset values to account for the costs to liquidate the corporation’s assets warranted reversal.” Additionally, since there was no evidence of an intention to liquidate the company or its assets, the court declined to adjust for the built-in gains tax consequences urged by the majority shareholder.
Maginnis v. Maginnis
In this unpublished opinion, the Kentucky Appellate Court remanded the decision as to the value of the husband’s business for, among other things, the Family Court’s failure to consider an apportionment of goodwill between enterprise and personal goodwill. It also remanded for a reconsideration of the maintenance award to the wife since that award is based in part on the value of the business and the income of the husband.
Guge v. Kassel Enters.
This case was decided, on appeal, under the Iowa “election-to-purchase-in-lieu-of-dissolution statute.” The court decided that, because the parties’ experts had “both included transaction costs in their valuations under a net asset approach, the district court’s failure to reduce the asset values to account for the costs to liquidate the corporation’s assets warranted reversal.” Additionally, since there was no evidence of an intention to liquidate the company or its assets, the court declined to adjust for the built-in gains tax consequences urged by the majority shareholder.
Trial Court Fails to Consider Apportionment of Goodwill in a Marital Dissolution Case
In this unpublished opinion, the Kentucky Appellate Court remanded the decision as to the value of the husband’s business for, among other things, the Family Court’s failure to consider an apportionment of goodwill between enterprise and personal goodwill. It also remanded for a reconsideration of the maintenance award to the wife since that award is based in part on the value of the business and the income of the husband.
Dipak Patel v. Siddhi Hospitality, LLC
This case dealt with compensation for a partner’s 25% interest in a business after he was expelled from the business. The appellate court remanded the case to the trial court for a recalculation of the compensation without the inclusion of discounts for lack of control and lack of marketability. The trial court allowed those discounts on the theory that the expelled partner was to receive the fair market value of his 25% interest in the entity. The appellate court determined that the operating agreement required him to be compensated for 25% of the FMV of the assets of the LLC and not the FMV of his 25% in the LLC entity.
Oregon Appellate Court Disallows Discounts for Lack of Control and Lack of Marketability
This case dealt with compensation for a partner’s 25% interest in a business after he was expelled from the business. The appellate court remanded the case to the trial court for a recalculation of the compensation without the inclusion of discounts for lack of control and lack of marketability. The trial court allowed those discounts on the theory that the expelled partner was to receive the fair market value of his 25% interest in the entity. The appellate court determined that the operating agreement required him to be compensated for 25% of the FMV of the assets of the LLC and not the FMV of his 25% in the LLC entity.
Island Light & Power Co. v. Sara Golvinveaux McGinnes 2011 Trust
In this shareholder dissent suit, the one-third shareholder of Island Light & Power Co. (aka BIPCO) dissented to a forced sale of the assets of BIPCO resulting in a liquidation of BIPCO and of the shareholder Trust’s stock. In a resulting bench trial, the court rejected the fair value determinations of the experts for both parties and adopted its own methodology (as is allowed by Rhode Island courts, including its Supreme Court) to determine the fair value of the one-third interest held by the Trust.
Court Adopts its Own Methodology in Determining Fair Value in a Shareholder Dissent Suit
In this shareholder dissent suit in Rhode Island, the one-third shareholder of Island Light & Power Co. (aka BIPCO) dissented to a forced sale of the assets of BIPCO resulting in a liquidation of BIPCO and a liquidation of the shareholder Trust’s stock. In a bench trial resulting from the dissent, the court rejected the fair value determinations of the experts for both parties and adopted its own methodology (as is allowed by Rhode Island courts, including its Supreme Court) to determine the fair value of the one-third interest held by the Trust.
Court Rejects Creditor’s Objection to Discharge Based on Debtor’s Alleged Concealment of Client List From Accounting Business Client
In this bankruptcy case, the court found there was no support for a creditor’s objection to discharge, where the creditor had sold her accounting business to the debtor and later claimed the debtor had concealed the existence and value of the business’s client list allegedly with the intent to defraud the creditor or the bankruptcy trustee.
In re Baker
In this bankruptcy case, the court found there was no support for a creditor’s objection to discharge, where the creditor had sold her accounting business to the debtor and later claimed the debtor had concealed the existence and value of the business’s client list allegedly with the intent to defraud the creditor or the bankruptcy trustee.
In re Appraisal of Regal Entertainment Group
In a merger action involving a publicly traded company, dissenting shareholders sued for a higher value than the deal consideration. Under the applicable appraisal jurisprudence, the court calculates fair value using the deal price minus synergies and adjusting for the change in value of the target between the signing and closing of the transaction.
In Appraisal Action, Court Determines Fair Value Using Deal Price Minus Synergies and Adjusting for Increase in Value From Signing to Closing of Merger
In a merger action involving a publicly traded company, dissenting shareholders sued for a higher value than the deal consideration. Under the applicable appraisal jurisprudence, the court calculates fair value using the deal price minus synergies and adjusting for the change in value of the target between the signing and closing of the transaction.
Estate of Michael J. Jackson v. Commissioner
Tax Court mostly sides with estate of late superstar in valuing three contested assets; assets had to be valued separately, based on parties’ stipulations, and at death; court says Jackson’s “tattered” image and likeness meant he earned little money apart from his music; court rejects tax affecting.
Tax Court Hands Jackson Estate Major Win but Finds Reasoning for Tax Affecting Unpersuasive
Tax Court mostly sides with estate of late superstar in valuing three contested assets; assets had to be valued separately, based on parties’ stipulations, and at death; court says Jackson’s “tattered” image and likeness meant he earned little money apart from his music; court rejects tax affecting.
Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (II)
In this divorce case, the Connecticut Supreme Court, overturning the appellate court, clarifies that awarding the nonowner spouse part of the value of the owner spouse’s businesses and basing alimony on income generated from the businesses is not impermissible double counting (double dipping).