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
Scalia v. Farmers National Bank of Danville & Weddle Bros. Const. Co.
Under new processing agreement between DOL and specific ESOP trustee, trustee is bound by strict rules on how to handle controlling-interest acquisitions and indemnification issues; trustee must ensure ESOP plan acquires a series of specified rights before approving payment of a control premium.
Great Hill Equity Partners IV, LP v. SIG Growth Equity Fund I, LLP
Court rejects plaintiff’s damages calculation related to sweeping fraud and contract breach allegations where plaintiff submitted expert report before court’s liability rulings and failed to offer revised expert report after liability trial; damages were not sufficiently tied to proven wrongs.
Plaintiff’s Overbroad Damages Calculation Prompts Court Not to Grant Award for Proven Wrongdoing
Court rejects plaintiff’s damages calculation related to sweeping fraud and contract breach allegations where plaintiff submitted expert report before court’s liability rulings and failed to offer revised expert report after liability trial; damages were not sufficiently tied to proven wrongs.
Court Finds Delayed Disclosure of Expert’s Complete Report ‘Substantially Justified’
Court denies defendants’ Rule 37 motion to exclude opposing expert’s report and testimony; court notes reason for expert report’s ...
Wright v. Old Gringo, Inc.
Court denies defendants’ Rule 37 motion to exclude opposing expert’s report and testimony; court notes reason for expert report’s lateness was defendants’ litigation strategy, including efforts to thwart production of financial information vital for valuation of company and damages calculation.
DOL’s Valuation-Related Claims Against Individual Actors Survive Motion to Dismiss
Court denies individual defendants’ motion to dismiss DOL’s claims that defendants breached duties as co-fiduciaries, violated a duty to monitor the co-defendant trustee, and knowingly participated in the trustee’s breaches; DOL’s complaint states sufficient facts to support claims, court finds.
Pizzella v. Reliance Trust Co.
Court denies individual defendants’ motion to dismiss DOL’s claims that defendants breached duties as co-fiduciaries, violated a duty to monitor the co-defendant trustee, and knowingly participated in the trustee’s breaches; DOL’s complaint states sufficient facts to support claims, court finds.
Eurochem North America Corp. v. Ganske
Court finds proposed expert testimony inadmissible under Rule 702 and Daubert where expert did not himself prepare the value determination, conceded any estimate of value by his firm was prepared for marketing purposes, and where damages model that expert testimony supported was fatally flawed.
Lack of Valuation Credentials Does Not Disqualify Expert, but Failure to Perform Valuation Does, Court Finds
Court finds proposed expert testimony inadmissible under Rule 702 and Daubert where expert did not himself prepare the value determination, conceded any estimate of value by his firm was prepared for marketing purposes, and where damages model that expert testimony supported was fatally flawed.
Court Rejects Parties’ Expert Valuations of Unique Sailing Vessel as Unreliable
In damages case involving unique ship for which there was no active market, court says parties’ experts provided some data points relevant to valuing ship but failed to give adequate explanations of rationales and calculations, making testimony unreliable; court performs its own analysis.
In re Manhattan By Sail, Inc.
In damages case involving unique ship for which there was no active market, court says parties’ experts provided some data points relevant to valuing ship but failed to give adequate explanations of rationales and calculations, making testimony unreliable; court performs its own analysis.
In re Panera Bread Company
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; synergy deduction is appropriate to account for value from anticipated cost and tax-related savings due to merger.
Court Considers Deal Price Persuasive Indicator of Fair Value and Approves Synergy Deduction
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; synergy deduction is appropriate to account for value from anticipated cost and tax-related savings due to merger.
Manichaean Capital, LLC v. SourceHOV Holdings, Inc.
In appraisal proceeding, Court of Chancery adopts petitioner expert’s DCF-based model for calculating fair value, making slight adjustment to expert’s size premium; on beta calculation, court finds respondent expert’s novel approach “does not survive judicial scrutiny” and raises Daubert issues.
Novel Beta Method Occasions Rebuke From Court of Chancery in Appraisal Case
In appraisal proceeding, Court of Chancery adopts petitioner expert’s DCF-based model for calculating fair value, making slight adjustment to expert’s size premium; on beta calculation, court finds respondent expert’s novel approach “does not survive judicial scrutiny” and raises Daubert issues.
Trustee’s Post-Trial Attack on DOL’s Pursuit of Monetary Relief on Plan’s Behalf Crumbles
District court denies trustee’s motion for a new trial based on argument that Secretary of Labor lacked authority to pursue monetary relief against defendants; court says the plain language of the statute on which the DOL’s claims are based allows secretary to obtain damages on behalf of the ESOP.
Pizzella v. Vinoskey (II)
District court denies trustee’s motion for a new trial based on argument that Secretary of Labor lacked authority to pursue monetary relief against defendants; court says the plain language of the statute on which the DOL’s claims are based allows secretary to obtain damages on behalf of the ESOP.
Plaintiff Fails Panduit Test Where Lost Profits Analysis Includes ‘Far More’ Than Value of Patents
In infringement case, court rejects plaintiff expert’s lost profits and reasonable royalty analyses, noting both rely on supply agreements covering more than the value of the patents; plaintiff fails Panduit test but is entitled to reasonable royalty based on opposing expert’s calculation.
Sunoco Partnership Mktg. & Terminals L.P. v. U.S. Venture, Inc.
In infringement case, court rejects plaintiff expert’s lost profits and reasonable royalty analyses, noting both rely on supply agreements covering more than the value of the patents; plaintiff fails Panduit test but is entitled to reasonable royalty based on opposing expert’s calculation.
Coster v. UIP Companies, Inc.
In breach of fiduciary duty action, court says stock sale passes enhanced fairness review; appraiser valuing real estate investment services company before sale is eminently qualified and knowledgeable about industry; capitalized cash flow method “generated a reliable indicator” of company’s value.
Valuation Underlying Controversial Stock Sale Satisfies Highest Scrutiny
In breach of fiduciary duty action, court says stock sale passes enhanced fairness review; appraiser valuing real estate investment services company before sale is eminently qualified and knowledgeable about industry; capitalized cash flow method “generated a reliable indicator” of company’s value.
Ohio Court Affirms Facts of Case Don’t Require ‘Double-Dipping Offset’
Ohio appeals court upholds trial court’s spousal support determination based on husband’s average, rather than normalized, income, finding “equity did not require a double-dipping offset”; court agrees with sister court’s ruling in Gallo that applicable statute does not prohibit double dipping.
Kim v. Kim
Ohio appeals court upholds trial court’s spousal support determination based on husband’s average, rather than normalized, income, finding “equity did not require a double-dipping offset”; court agrees with sister court’s ruling in Gallo that applicable statute does not prohibit double dipping.
Court Decides Daubert Exclusion of Expert Testimony for Failure to Apportion Is Premature
In trade secrets dispute, court denies defendant’s Daubert motion, finding exclusion of opposing damages expert testimony for failure to apportion is premature; whether or not entire market value rule applies is determination for jury “after hearing all the documentary and testimonial evidence.”
Pawelko v. Hasbro, Inc.
In trade secrets dispute, court denies defendant’s Daubert motion, finding exclusion of opposing damages expert testimony for failure to apportion is premature; whether or not entire market value rule applies is determination for jury “after hearing all the documentary and testimonial evidence.”