Trustee Succeeds in Curtailing DOL Expert Testimony Under Daubert
In ESOP dispute, court partially excludes DOL expert’s damages analysis under Daubert; court finds expert’s market comparable approach to support overpayment claim is unreliable as is expert’s methodology for calculating alleged loss in stock value to existing shareholders.
Acosta v. Vinoskey
In ESOP dispute, court partially excludes DOL expert’s damages analysis under Daubert; court finds expert’s market comparable approach to support overpayment claim is unreliable as is expert’s methodology for calculating alleged loss in stock value to existing shareholders.
ASA BVers convene in Houston for the Advanced BV Conference
The conference sessions were an excellent mix of theory and practice—ideas that you can use in your practice right away.
Court Stands Behind Earlier ESOP Liability and Damages Rulings
Notwithstanding errors related to the court’s liability and damages determinations, the court rejects trustee’s motion for reconsideration as an inappropriate effort to introduce new legal theories and a late attempt to present a competing damages methodo ...
Court adheres to earlier ESOP liability and damages rulings
In a controversial ESOP case that turned on the trustee’s oversight of the pretransaction valuation work, the defendant trustee recently filed a motion for reconsideration. It argued the court had committed errors related to its liability and damages findings. Although the court owned up to some mistakes, including a misunderstanding of the concept of beta, it ultimately stuck to its earlier decision.
Trustee Liable for Inadequate ESOP Valuation Vetting
Court finds ESOP trustee liable for allowing overpayment for company shares; trustee rushed transaction and failed to scrutinize financial advisor’s valuation ignoring red flags related to projections, use of control premium, beta, rounding up of values.
ESOP Trustee Evaded Fiduciary Duties by Delegating Valuation
Court finds ESOP trustee liable for causing plan to overpay; trustee “delegated” valuation to ESOP valuator without inquiring into valuation components, including projections, and without exploring “glaring” gaps (industry analysis) in valuation report.
Brundle v. Wilmington Trust N.A. (II)
Notwithstanding errors related to the court’s liability and damages determinations, the court rejects trustee’s motion for reconsideration as an inappropriate effort to introduce new legal theories and a late attempt to present a competing damages methodo ...
Court Defends Earlier ESOP Liability and Damages Rulings
Notwithstanding errors related to the court’s liability and damages determinations, the court rejects trustee’s motion for reconsideration as an inappropriate effort to introduce new legal theories and a late attempt to present a competing damages methodo ...
Another ESOP trustee in trouble over valuation
For the second time in March 2017, a court found an ESOP trustee liable for causing the plan to overpay. The most recent decision chronicles in exhaustive detail how the trustee failed the plan in terms of ensuring that no more than fair market value would be paid for the seller’s shares.
ESOP trustee’s failure to vet valuation causes significant overpayment
Inadequate trustee performance was at the center of a recent case, featuring a nontraditional ESOP structure. The court found that, if the trustee had engaged with the underlying valuation, it would have discovered numerous weaknesses and prevented the ESOP from overpaying for the company stock.
ESOP Trustee Evaded Fiduciary Duties by Delegating Valuation
Court finds ESOP trustee liable for causing plan to overpay; trustee “delegated” valuation to ESOP valuator without inquiring into valuation components, including projections, and without exploring “glaring” gaps (industry analysis) in valuation report.
Perez v. First Bankers Trust Services, Inc.
Court finds ESOP trustee liable for causing plan to overpay; trustee “delegated” valuation to ESOP valuator without inquiring into valuation components, including projections, and without exploring “glaring” gaps (industry analysis) in valuation report.
Brundle v. Wilmington Trust N.A. (I)
Court finds ESOP trustee liable for allowing overpayment for company shares; trustee rushed transaction and failed to scrutinize financial advisor’s valuation ignoring red flags related to projections, use of control premium, beta, rounding up of values.
Trustee Liable for Inadequate ESOP Valuation Vetting
Court finds ESOP trustee liable for allowing overpayment for company shares; trustee rushed transaction and failed to scrutinize financial advisor’s valuation ignoring red flags related to projections, use of control premium, beta, rounding up of values.
How Repurchase Obligations Impact Valuation
As more baby-boomer business owners reach retirement age, the popularity of employee stock ownership plans (ESOP) are on the rise. Appraisers must become comfortable understanding how the future repurchase liability will impact the company’s future financial condition and the value of the ESOP shares. The popularity of 100% S corporation ESOPs over the last two decades has created many mature ESOPs with baby-boomer participants getting ready to retire and looking to cash out their ESOP ...
Persuasive’ Defense Expert Testimony Defeats ESOP Overpayment Claims
Court says defense expert opinion provides “credible and persuasive” support for court’s conclusion that ESOP financial advisor produced sound fairness and valuation opinions prior to contested transaction; there was no overpayment for stock at issue.
Persuasive’ Defense Expert Testimony Defeats ESOP Overpayment Claims
Court says defense expert opinion provides “credible and persuasive” support for court’s conclusion that ESOP financial advisor produced sound fairness and valuation opinions prior to contested transaction; there was no overpayment for stock at issue.
Fish v. GreatBanc Trust Co.
Court says defense expert opinion provides “credible and persuasive” support for court’s conclusion that ESOP financial advisor produced sound fairness and valuation opinions prior to contested transaction; there was no overpayment for stock at issue.
In Unusual ESOP Case, 5th Circuit Validates FMV Computation
5th Circuit upholds district court’s liability and remedy findings in ESOP case; lower court’s weighting and averaging of valuation results offered by parties’ experts to compute amount of overpayment “was founded in established valuation methodology.”
5th Circuit backs district court's fair market value determination in ESOP dispute
The district court's determination of overpayment was a function of the contract price and the stock’s fair market value on each of three transaction dates. For its FMV determination, the court considered the testimony of three noted valuation experts retained by the plaintiffs, the DOL, and the defendants respectively. Different experts used different methods, different assumptions, different estimates, and they reached different conclusions. But they all used multiple approaches to produce several FMV estimates on the transaction dates. To arrive at a final value determination, or range of values, they all averaged or weighted the results.
Perez v. Bruister (II)
5th Circuit upholds district court’s liability and remedy findings in ESOP case; lower court’s weighting and averaging of valuation results offered by parties’ experts to compute amount of overpayment “was founded in established valuation methodology.”
ESOP valuations not on safe ground—despite final DOL rules
Although ESOP valuation experts have been exempted from the DOL’s final fiduciary rules, it’s still not safe to go back into the water, experts say.
Averaging Multiple Appraisals Yields Most Reliable FMV
In ESOP case, court finds trustees unreasonably relied on appraiser’s valuations and overpaid for company stock; court credits parties’ three experts equally and arrives at fair market value by averaging results from experts’ multiple calculations.