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
In Gatekeeper Role, Court Trains Attention on Expert Methodology, Not Conclusions
In ESOP case pivoting on valuation, court denies parties’ Daubert challenges; court notes “gatekeeping” means focusing “on principles and methodology, not the conclusions that [the experts] generate”; parties’ objections are mostly quarrels with opposing expert’s conclusions, court finds.
Acosta v. Wilmington Trust, N.A. (I) (Graphite)
In ESOP case pivoting on valuation, court denies parties’ Daubert challenges; court notes “gatekeeping” means focusing “on principles and methodology, not the conclusions that [the experts] generate”; parties’ objections are mostly quarrels with opposing expert’s conclusions, court finds.
My Imagination v. M.Z. Berger & Co. (II)
Court denies plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration, affirming earlier finding that the expert did not offer an opinion as to damages for loss of business value; expert never offered any opinion of business’s value at any time, court says.
Appeals Court Upholds Grocery Store Buyout Ruling and Fair Value Determination
Appeals court upholds district court’s buyout order of minority shareholder’s interests in related family businesses (grocery store chain) as well as district court’s fair value determination; district court’s valuation “falls squarely” between trial experts’ valuations, appeals court says.
Lund v. Lund (II)
Appeals court upholds district court’s buyout order of minority shareholder’s interests in related family businesses (grocery store chain) as well as district court’s fair value determination; district court’s valuation “falls squarely” between trial experts’ valuations, appeals court says.
Stephanos v. Stephanos (In re Marriage of Stephanos)
Trial court adopts goodwill value determination of wife’s expert (residual method) as well as expert’s finding that none of goodwill in family business is personal to owner spouse; business’s success was not dependent on owner’s continued presence or his execution of a noncompete, court says.
Divorce Court Finds No Personal Goodwill Value in Single-Owner Business
Trial court adopts goodwill value determination of wife’s expert (residual method) as well as expert’s finding that none of goodwill in family business is personal to owner spouse; business’s success was not dependent on owner’s continued presence or his execution of a noncompete, court says.
Cargotec Corp. v. Logan Industries
Appeals court majority strikes down lost profits and diminished business value awards, finding plaintiff failed to show causation and its damages expert based his calculations on management’s business plan without substantiating the plan’s underlying (unreasonable) gross profit goals.
Court’s Majority Says Expert’s Reliance on Management Projections Was Unreasonable
Appeals court majority strikes down lost profits and diminished business value awards, finding plaintiff failed to show causation and its damages expert based his calculations on management’s business plan without substantiating the plan’s underlying (unreasonable) gross profit goals.
Louisiana Courts Wrestle With Treatment of Debt in Community Property Valuation
In community property partition case, appeals court upholds valuation of community-owned firm; firm is not responsible for debts of an acquired company that are personally guaranteed by husband but not by express corporate contract; valuation must not subtract debt amount.
Henry v. Henry
In community property partition case, appeals court upholds valuation of community-owned firm; firm is not responsible for debts of an acquired company that are personally guaranteed by husband but not by express corporate contract; valuation must not subtract debt amount.
Court Limits Damages for Copyright Infringement, Noting Lack of ‘Causal Nexus’
Ruling on defendant’s post-trial motions, court reduces damages for copyright infringement where plaintiff’s expert included in damage calculation defendant’s profits for years for which the plaintiff failed to show “causal nexus” between profits claimed and the actual infringement.
Infogroup, Inc. v. Database USA.com LLC
Ruling on defendant’s post-trial motions, court reduces damages for copyright infringement where plaintiff’s expert included in damage calculation defendant’s profits for years for which the plaintiff failed to show “causal nexus” between profits claimed and the actual infringement.
Court Says Daubert’s ‘Gatekeeper’ Role Favors Inclusion, Not Exclusion
In contract and tort case, court declines to exclude plaintiff’s damages expert, noting court’s gatekeeping function “is not a role that emphasizes exclusion of expert testimony”; expert’s background in economics and business valuation experience qualified him to value subject company.
Ferraro v. Convercent, Inc.
In contract and tort case, court declines to exclude plaintiff’s damages expert, noting court’s gatekeeping function “is not a role that emphasizes exclusion of expert testimony”; expert’s background in economics and business valuation experience qualified him to value subject company.
Namerow v. PediatriCare Associates, LLC
In pediatrician buyout suit, court says practice’s operating agreement requires net worth calculation; court agrees with defense expert’s definition of “net worth” as the value of assets minus liabilities, as stated in the balance sheets, and rejects proposed inclusion of intangible assets.
Court Says Expert’s Inclusion of Intangible Assets Violates Buyout Agreement
In pediatrician buyout suit, court says practice’s operating agreement requires net worth calculation; court agrees with defense expert’s definition of “net worth” as the value of assets minus liabilities, as stated in the balance sheets, and rejects proposed inclusion of intangible assets.
Zayo Group v. Latisys Holdings, LLC
In contract dispute, Chancery rejects plaintiff’s damages analysis, noting expert lacked valuation experience and chose a methodology (EBITDA multiple) that did not fit facts of case; court says there was no evidence that the alleged breach permanently diminished value of the acquired company.
Expert’s Use of Wrong Damages Methodology Results in ‘Grossly Inflated’ Damages
In contract dispute, Chancery rejects plaintiff’s damages analysis, noting expert lacked valuation experience and chose a methodology (EBITDA multiple) that did not fit facts of case; court says there was no evidence that the alleged breach permanently diminished value of the acquired company.
Persaud v. Goad
Court affirms divorce valuations for mixed real estate and business assets; even if trial court erred in stating negative value for business that generated no income but carried high annual costs, the error was harmless where court reframed decision as one of fairness rather than finances.
Mix of Real Estate and Business Assets Poses Valuation Challenges for Courts
Court affirms divorce valuations for mixed real estate and business assets; even if trial court erred in stating negative value for business that generated no income but carried high annual costs, the error was harmless where court reframed decision as one of fairness rather than finances.
Enplas Display Device Corp. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co.
Court majority says jury award was based on insufficient evidence because expert’s damage theory envisioned a premium freedom-to-operate license based on past sales of noninfringing products; dissent says expert’s hypothetical negotiation reflected real world concerns and supported award.
Federal Circuit Majority Says ‘Premium’ License Calculation Includes Noninfringing Products
Court majority says jury award was based on insufficient evidence because expert’s damage theory envisioned a premium freedom-to-operate license based on past sales of noninfringing products; dissent says expert’s hypothetical negotiation reflected real world concerns and supported award.
Noven Pharmaceuticals v Novartis Pharmaceuticals
In breach of contract action, court finds defendant’s valuation report is discoverable; report is relevant to an issue in dispute and not protected by attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine where valuation was not done solely in anticipation of litigation but had mixed purpose.
Court Finds Defendant’s Valuation Had ‘Mixed Purpose’ and Orders Disclosure
In breach of contract action, court finds defendant’s valuation report is discoverable; report is relevant to an issue in dispute and not protected by attorney-client privilege or work-product doctrine where valuation was not done solely in anticipation of litigation but had mixed purpose.