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
Court Rejects Expert’s Reliance on Other Celebrity Royalty Agreements to Develop Damages Analysis
In IP case, appeals court upholds exclusion of expert testimony; one expert’s damages analysis was based on speculative assumptions as to link between increase in defendant’s revenue and infringement; second expert’s analysis was inadmissible, hinging on first expert’s unreliable opinion.
Daubert Ruling on How to Satisfy Apportionment When Using Benchmark Licenses
Allowing that apportionment is “inherently imprecise,” court says damages expert’s supplemental report shows that the apportionment underlying three benchmark licenses aligns with the expert’s royalty rate in the hypothetical license; expert’s royalty opinion is admissible under Daubert.
Olive v. General Nutrition Centers
In IP case, appeals court upholds exclusion of expert testimony; one expert’s damages analysis was based on speculative assumptions as to link between increase in defendant’s revenue and infringement; second expert’s analysis was inadmissible, hinging on first expert’s unreliable opinion.
Bio Rad Labs. v. 10X Genomics, Inc. (II)
Allowing that apportionment is “inherently imprecise,” court says damages expert’s supplemental report shows that the apportionment underlying three benchmark licenses aligns with the expert’s royalty rate in the hypothetical license; expert’s royalty opinion is admissible under Daubert.
Saltzer v. Rolka
In buyout dispute, appellate court upholds trial court’s valuation of company, which applies company-specific risk discount related to uncertain extension of company’s key contract but does not deduct value of personal goodwill attributable to remaining members.
Appellate Court Upholds Use of Risk Discount in Fair Value Determination
In buyout dispute, appellate court upholds trial court’s valuation of company, which applies company-specific risk discount related to uncertain extension of company’s key contract but does not deduct value of personal goodwill attributable to remaining members.
Court Concludes Plaintiff Cannot Satisfy Three-Part New York Lost Profits Test
Court says plaintiff fails New York test for lost profits; plaintiff lacks coherent damages theory and, by its own admission, is unable to do more than speculate about future profitability; expert calculation represents “the sort of conjecture the reasonable certainty standard prohibits.”
MY Imagination v. M.Z. Berger & Co. (I)
Court says plaintiff fails New York test for lost profits; plaintiff lacks coherent damages theory and, by its own admission, is unable to do more than speculate about future profitability; expert calculation represents “the sort of conjecture the reasonable certainty standard prohibits.”
Divided High Court Says Earn-Out Payments From Company Sale Are a Marital Asset
Earn-out payments related to sale of a marital asset were marital asset and subject to equitable distribution, Supreme Court’s majority says, even though value of the payments was uncertain as of the valuation date and the sale of the husband’s company took place after the valuation date.
Gill v. Gill
Earn-out payments related to sale of a marital asset were marital asset and subject to equitable distribution, Supreme Court’s majority says, even though value of the payments was uncertain as of the valuation date and the sale of the husband’s company took place after the valuation date.
5th Circuit Upholds Tax Court’s Characterization of Interest and Discount Rulings
In estate tax dispute, Tax Court agrees with IRS that decedent transferred limited partner interest, not assignee interest, to revocable trust; under partnership agreement, limited partner had rights not available to assignee; court rejects discount for lack of control and adopts IRS’ DLOM rate.
Estate of Streightoff v. Commissioner (I)
In estate tax dispute, Tax Court agrees with IRS that decedent transferred limited partner interest, not assignee interest, to revocable trust; under partnership agreement, limited partner had rights not available to assignee; court rejects discount for lack of control and adopts IRS’ DLOM rate.
‘Real-World Market Evidence’ Does Not Support Dissenters’ Damages Claim, Chancery Says
Chancery says plaintiffs proved directors breached fiduciary duties and duty to disclose but failed to prove damages; court rejects plaintiff experts’ DCF analysis, noting problematic projections and beta; “real-world market evidence” shows company was not worth more than deal price.
In re PLX Tech. Stockholders Litig.
Chancery says plaintiffs proved directors breached fiduciary duties and duty to disclose but failed to prove damages; court rejects plaintiff expert's DCF analysis, noting problematic projections and beta; “real-world market evidence” shows company was not worth more than deal price.
Meridian Mfg. v. C&B Mfg.
Court admits expert opinion that reasonable royalty cannot exceed cost of developing noninfringing alternative because opinion is based on facts of the case; court excludes opposing expert’s royalty because he failed to assess comparability of selected licenses to patented technology.
Underdeveloped Comparability Analysis Means Exclusion of Reasonable Royalty Opinion
Court admits expert opinion that reasonable royalty cannot exceed cost of developing noninfringing alternative because opinion is based on facts of the case; court excludes opposing expert’s royalty because he failed to assess comparability of selected licenses to patented technology.
Appeals Court Upholds Tax Court’s Section 1031 Decision Pivoting on ‘Tainted Appraisals’
Appeals court upholds Tax Court’s ruling that taxpayer’s transactions do not represent section 1031 like-kind exchanges because taxpayer never assumed ownership of replacement plants; improper input from taxpayer’s law firm tainted appraisals used to show otherwise; accuracy penalty is justified.
Exelon Corp. v. Commissioner
Appeals court upholds Tax Court’s ruling that taxpayer’s transactions do not represent section 1031 like-kind exchanges because taxpayer never assumed ownership of replacement plants; improper input from taxpayer’s law firm tainted appraisals used to show otherwise; accuracy penalty is justified.
Daubert Ruling on How to Satisfy Apportionment When Using Benchmark Licenses
Court finds plaintiff expert’s lost profits calculation regarding two-supplier market is inadmissible and rejects reasonable royalty to the extent expert failed to explain how apportionment in benchmark licenses relates to expert’s hypothetical license.
Bio Rad Labs. v. 10X Genomics, Inc. (I)
Court finds plaintiff expert’s lost profits calculation regarding two-supplier market is inadmissible and rejects reasonable royalty to the extent expert failed to explain how apportionment in benchmark licenses relates to expert’s hypothetical license.
Can ESOP Appraisal Satisfy Charitable Contribution Reporting Requirement?
Court finds using ESOP appraisal to show “qualified appraisal” is a long shot to meet charitable contribution verification requirements because appraisal did not consider tax consequences or value shares individual petitioners donated, but petitioners may have reasonable cause defense.
Chrem v. Commissioner
Court finds using ESOP appraisal to show “qualified appraisal” is a long shot to meet charitable contribution verification requirements because appraisal did not consider tax consequences or value shares individual petitioners donated, but petitioners may have reasonable cause defense.
Expert’s Failure to Explain Basis for Compensation Analysis Renders Testimony Inadmissible
In condemnation case requiring fair market value analysis to determine compensation due to landowners, court excludes defense expert testimony, citing failure to follow mandated methodology and standard of value; court calls aspects of loss calculation based on income approach “disturbing.”
Rover Pipeline LLC v. 10.55 Acres
In condemnation case requiring fair market value analysis to determine compensation due to landowners, court excludes defense expert testimony, citing failure to follow mandated methodology and standard of value; court calls aspects of loss calculation based on income approach “disturbing.”
Mesirov v. Enbridge Energy Co.
In dispute over related-party transaction, court upholds aiding and abetting claim against financial advisor; plaintiffs produced enough facts to show fairness opinion ignored most relevant precedent transaction and other valuation metrics indicating the buyer was overpaying for contested asset.