AFM Mattress Co. v. Motorists Commercial Mutual Insurance Company
In this business interruption case resulting from mandatory shutdowns to control COVID-19, the court grants a motion to dismiss claims of plaintiff. While plaintiff claims losses due to COVID-19, it does not sufficiently move the court to consider the virus exclusion of the policy inapplicable. A motion for a sur-response to espouse an alternative theory was also denied but without prejudice.
In COVID-19 Business Interruption Case, Court Finds Plaintiffs Did Not Argue Physical Loss and Virus Exemption Applies
In this business interruption case resulting from mandatory shutdowns to control COVID-19, the court grants a motion to dismiss claims of plaintiff. While plaintiff claims losses due to COVID-19, it does not sufficiently move the court to consider the virus exclusion of the policy inapplicable. A motion for a sur-response to espouse an alternative theory was also denied but without prejudice.
Court Deems Future Lost Profits Formula an Exercise in Speculation
Court rejects lost profits projections based on expert’s unique formula finding calculation was based on “questionable” assumptions; court also finds no “hard” evidence that damage from defendant’s conduct had long-term effect on plaintiff’s customers.
Court Deems Future Lost Profits Formula an Exercise in Speculation
Court rejects lost profits projections based on expert’s unique formula finding calculation was based on “questionable” assumptions; court also finds no “hard” evidence that damage from defendant’s conduct had long-term effect on plaintiff’s customers.
Mattress Closeout Ctr. IV, LLC v. Panera, LLC
Court rejects lost profits projections based on expert’s unique formula finding calculation was based on “questionable” assumptions; court also finds no “hard” evidence that damage from defendant’s conduct had long-term effect on plaintiff’s customers.
Must distinguish between personal and enterprise goodwill
Mark Frazier and Sandra Frazier divorced on Feb. 24, 2000, and Mark appealed the marital property division to the Court of Appeals of Indiana.
Frazier v. Frazier
At issue is the valuation of the couple's furniture business.
Purchase From Brother Not Indicative of Value
One of the primary issues in the trial of this marital dissolution was the valuation of husband's 90.5% interest in a furniture business for property division purposes. The trial court found ...
Siker v. Siker
At issue is the valuation of husband's furniture business.
Prevaluation Date Transaction Between Brothers Is Not Indicative of Value
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's valuation of the parties' furniture business in 1998. The lower court determined that a pre-valuation date redemption of the husband's brother's interest in the business was not probative. It furth ...
Ellis v. Ellis
At issue is the equitable distribution of the parties' marital property, particularly the appreciation in value of plaintiff's stock in the business.