Crypto theft not a ‘direct physical loss,’ court affirms
The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a district court’s ruling that a homeowner’s insurance policy does not cover the theft of cryptocurrency because it is not a “direct physical loss” as required by the policy.
Sedaghatpour v. Lemonade Ins. Co. (II)
Similar to what happened with many of the pandemic cases, the court here determined that cryptocurrencies did not have a physical presence or at least not one that was part of the cause of the theft that the plaintiff suffered. Definitions of cryptocurrencies supported the decision of the court. The Court of Appeals affirmed this case. In valuing cryptocurrencies, the lack of insurance coverage could be an additional risk to be considered. Subsequent to the date of this claim, most insurance companies had specifically excluded loss of cryptocurrency from coverage.
Keurig penalty illustrates practice opportunity regarding ESG fraud
At the recent ASA International Appraisers Conference in Portland, Ore., Carla Nunes (Kroll) discussed ESG matters and mentioned the recent $1.5 million fine Keurig paid to settle SEC charges that the company falsely claimed that its K-cup pods were recyclable.
The Comprehensive Guide to Economic Damages, Seventh Edition
April 2023 Hardcover, PDF (501 pages)
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
Ali Sedaghatpour v. Lemonade Ins. Co. (I)
Similar to what happened with many of the pandemic cases, the court here determined that cryptocurrencies did not have a physical presence or at least not one that was part of the cause of the theft that the plaintiff suffered. Definitions of cryptocurrencies supported the decision of the court. The Court of Appeals affirmed this case. In valuing cryptocurrencies, the lack of insurance coverage could be an additional risk to be considered. Subsequent to the date of this claim, most insurance companies had specifically excluded loss of cryptocurrency from coverage.
Cryptocurrency Determined Not to Be a Physical Loss and Not Covered by Insurance
Similar to what happened with many of the pandemic cases, the court here determined that cryptocurrencies did not have a physical presence or at least not one that was part of the cause of the theft that the plaintiff suffered. Definitions of cryptocurrencies supported the decision of the court. The Court of Appeals affirmed this case. In valuing cryptocurrencies, the lack of insurance coverage could be an additional risk to be considered. Subsequent to the date of this claim, most insurance companies had specifically excluded loss of cryptocurrency from coverage.
Kuzma v. N. Ariz. Healthcare Corp.
The defendants in this qui tam case asked for summary judgment against the plaintiff Relator, who had alleged violations of the False Claims Act as it related to the sale of Surgery and Rehabilitation Centers by the defendants. Relator brought suit against the defendants, alleging they violated the FCA by overpaying the physician-owners of the Summit Center to reward them for past business and to induce future business in violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. The defendants advanced three arguments in favor of summary judgment: (1) the acquisition price paid for the Summit Center was fair market value; (2) Relator had no evidence that the defendants acted with the requisite scienter; and (3) Relator cannot show a causal link between the alleged kickback and the submission of false claims.
U.S. District Court Partially Denies Motion for Summary Judgment Regarding Qui Tam Case on Excess Purchase Price Under the False Claims Act
The defendants in this qui tam case asked for summary judgment against the plaintiff Relator, who had alleged violations of the False Claims Act as it related to the sale of Surgery and Rehabilitation Centers by the defendants. Relator brought suit against the defendants, alleging they violated the FCA by overpaying the physician-owners of the Summit Center to reward them for past business and to induce future business in violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. The defendants advanced three arguments in favor of summary judgment: (1) the acquisition price paid for the Summit Center was fair market value; (2) Relator had no evidence that the defendants acted with the requisite scienter; and (3) Relator cannot show a causal link between the alleged kickback and the submission of false claims.
Five Areas to Explore If You Suspect a Spouse Is Hiding Crypto Assets in a Marital Dispute
In BVR’s recent webinar, Cryptocurrency Fraud and Forensics: What Valuation Professionals Need to Know, forensic and cryptocurrency experts Katerina Gaebel and Mark DiMichael, both of Citrin Cooperman, covered various hot topics on fraud and forensic accounting issues in digital assets and how they affect the business valuation profession. Here, we summarize five key areas where one would find proof of crypto asset fraud in a marital dispute, including interviews, tax returns, bank accounts, credit card statements, and more.
Expert Prevails by Documenting Adherence to Valuation Standards
In fraud case, court rejects Daubert challenge, finding expert sufficiently identified assumptions and estimates she relied on and properly re-created subject company’s financial situation based on AICPA standards and authoritative valuation treatises.
Expert Prevails by Documenting Adherence to Valuation Standards
In fraud case, court rejects Daubert challenge, finding expert sufficiently identified assumptions and estimates she relied on and properly re-created subject company’s financial situation based on AICPA standards and authoritative valuation treatises.
MSKP Oak Grove, LLC v. Venuto
In fraud case, court rejects Daubert challenge, finding expert sufficiently identified assumptions and estimates she relied on and properly re-created subject company’s financial situation based on AICPA standards and authoritative valuation treatises.
Four Experts Vie Over ‘Risk-Neutral’ Valuation of Annuities
Court permits plaintiffs’ expert to present a “risk-neutral,” out-of-pocket damages model for losses due to defendant’s allegedly fraudulent annuity products, finding that the model is commonly accepted in the financial and valuation community and the exp ...
Negrete v. Allianz Life Ins. Co. of N. America
Court permits plaintiffs’ expert to present a “risk-neutral,” out-of-pocket damages model for losses due to defendant’s allegedly fraudulent annuity products, finding that the model is commonly accepted in the financial and valuation community and the exp ...
Lost Profits Experts Must Tailor Damages to the Law and the Facts
Federal district court permits expert to testify regarding damages based on the value of plaintiff’s 5% share in the defendant closely held company, but bars testimony on prejudgment interest, pursuant to state law regarding unliquidated damages.
Expert Evidence Sufficient to Certify Securities Class But Requires More for Damages
Court relies on plaintiffs’ expert market event study to certify class for fraud claims based on speculative hedging contracts but warns that the same evidence may not be sufficiently reliable to prove classwide damages.
Gresh v. Waste Services of America
Federal district court permits expert to testify regarding damages based on the value of plaintiff’s 5% share in the defendant closely held company, but bars testimony on prejudgment interest, pursuant to state law regarding unliquidated damages.
Gresh v. Waste Services of America
Plaintiff Gerald Gresh commenced this civil action against Defendants, Waste Services of America, Inc. (WSA), W. Todd Skaggs, James P. Dalton and River Cities Disposal, LLC (RCD).
In re Sadia Securities Litigation
Court relies on plaintiffs’ expert market event study to certify class for fraud claims based on speculative hedging contracts, but warns that the same evidence may not be sufficiently reliable to prove class-wide damages.
Mass Drug Pricing Fraud Turns on Aggregate ‘Loss of Value’ Evidence
Massive claims of drug-overpricing turn on expert evidence of aggregate “loss of value” to Medicaid and other third-party payers.
Valuation of Noncompetes Critical to Multimillion-Dollar Fraudulent Transfer Case
Court relies on expert evidence to value multimillion-dollar noncompetition agreements in fraudulent transfer case.
In re Zyprexa Products Liability Litigation
Massive claims of drug-overpricing turn on expert evidence of aggregate “loss of value” to Medicaid and other third-party payors.
Expert’s Market Valuation Tested Under Frye Standard
Court admits expert testimony under state rule similar to the Frye standard regarding wide range of fair market value indicators for subsidiaries.
IGF Insurance Co. v. Continental Casualty Co. (I)
Court relies on expert evidence to value multi-million dollar non-competition agreements in fraudulent transfer case.
IGF Insurance Co. v. Continental Casualty Co. (II)
Court finds expert valuation of business non-competes and consulting agreements under “four-factor” test reliable under the Daubert standard.