Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Kruse v. Synapse Wireless, Inc.

In appraisal action arising out of controller’s buyout of minority stockholders, court finds there is no reliable market evidence as to target’s fair value on merger date; none of expert valuations are “wholly reliable,” but one expert’s DCF analysis offers a “proportionately reliable conclusion.”

Lacking Any Wholly Reliable Indicators of Fair Value, Court Adopts Respondent's DCF Model

In appraisal action arising out of controller's buyout of minority stockholders, court finds there is no reliable market evidence as to target's fair value on merger date; none of expert valuations are "wholly reliable," but one expert's DCF analysis offers a "proportionately reliable conclusion."

Expert’s Reasonable Royalty Properly Captured Value Added by Plaintiff’s Invention

Court denies defendants’ post-trial challenge to jury award; court finds award was based on a theory of reasonable royalty, not lost profits, as defendants claim; plaintiff expert’s royalty rate properly captured value added by plaintiff’s patent and relationship between plaintiff and defendants.

Simo Holdings, Inc. v. H.K. uCloudlink Network Tech. Ltd.

Court denies defendants’ post-trial challenge to jury award; court finds award was based on a theory of reasonable royalty, not lost profits, as defendants claim; plaintiff expert’s royalty rate properly captured value added by plaintiff’s patent and relationship between plaintiff and defendants.

Connecticut Appellate Court Remands Because of Impermissible Double Dipping

Appellate court remands because of trial court’s impermissible double dipping, where trial court awarded wife half of the fair market value of husband’s two solely owned businesses, which represented husband’s sole income stream, and based spousal support on annual income generated by businesses.

Oudheusden v. Oudheusden

Appellate court remands because of trial court’s impermissible double dipping, where trial court awarded wife half of the fair market value of husband’s two solely owned businesses, which represented husband’s sole income stream, and based spousal support on annual income generated by businesses.

Delaware Supreme Court Reproves Chancery’s Use of Unaffected Market Price in Aruba

Delaware Supreme Court overturns Court of Chancery’s fair value determination based on unaffected market price and awards petitioners deal price minus synergies as determined by company; trial court’s analysis rested on “inapt” agency-costs theory and raised due process and fairness concerns.

Verition Partners Master Fund Ltd. v. Aruba Networks, Inc. (Aruba III)

Delaware Supreme Court overturns Court of Chancery’s fair value determination based on unaffected market price and awards petitioners deal price minus synergies as determined by company; trial court’s analysis rested on “inapt” agency-costs theory and raised due process and fairness concerns.

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.

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.

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.

Chancery Defends Use of Market Price Citing Recent High Court Rulings

Court of Chancery denies petitioners’ motion for reargument, finding that, in light of high court’s Dell and DFC decisions, the decision to use the unaffected market price as the fair value indicator was not so “ridiculous” or “absurd” as to indicate the Court of Chancery misapprehended the law.

Verition Partners Master Fund Ltd. v. Aruba Networks, Inc.

Court of Chancery denies petitioners’ motion for reargument, finding that, in light of high court’s Dell and DFC decisions, the decision to use the unaffected market price as the fair value indicator was not so “ridiculous” or “absurd” as to indicate the Court of Chancery misapprehended the law.

Verition Partners Master Fund Ltd. v. Aruba Networks, Inc.

In statutory appraisal proceeding, Court of Chancery says unaffected market price provides “direct evidence of the collective view of market participants” as to target’s fair value whereas deal-price-minus-synergies is a less reliable “indirect measure.”

Court Calls Stock Price ‘Most Straightforward’ Indicator of Fair Value

In statutory appraisal proceeding, Court of Chancery says unaffected market price provides “direct evidence of the collective view of market participants” as to target’s fair value whereas deal price minus synergies is a less reliable “indirect measure."

Federal Circuit Discusses Rationale Behind Different Measures of Damages

Federal Circuit says expert’s royalty analysis was not improper “pseudo” lost profits analysis that tried to circumvent higher standard of proof, where expert considered plaintiff’s profits as one of many factors in her hypothetical-negotiation model.

Danmark v. CMI USA, Inc.

Federal Circuit says expert’s royalty analysis was not improper “pseudo” lost profits analysis that tried to circumvent higher standard of proof, where expert considered plaintiff’s profits as one of many factors in her hypothetical-negotiation model.

Federal Circuit Discusses Rationale Behind Different Measures of Damages

Federal Circuit says expert’s royalty analysis was not improper “pseudo” lost profits analysis that tried to circumvent higher standard of proof, where expert considered plaintiff’s profits as one of many factors in her hypothetical-negotiation model.

Inexact Apportionment Invalidates Expert’s Royalty Calculation

Court excludes plaintiff expert testimony under Daubert, finding both the expert’s royalty base and rate determinations fatally flawed due to the expert’s inexact apportionment; in valuing damages, he failed to compensate only for the infringement caused ...

Rembrandt Social Media, LP v. Facebook

Court excludes plaintiff expert testimony under Daubert, finding both the expert’s royalty base and rate determinations fatally flawed due to the expert’s inexact apportionment; in valuing damages, he failed to compensate only for the infringement caused ...

No Taboo Against Marketability Discount in Shareholder Suit

In dissenting shareholder action, appellate court finds trial court had discretion to dismiss valuations from parties’ experts as “prejudiced” and draw on a third-party investor proposal for a “more realistic value” of the subject company; it also affirms ...

Tutunikov v. Markov

In dissenting shareholder action, appellate court finds trial court had discretion to dismiss valuations from parties’ experts as “prejudiced” and draw on a third-party investor proposal for a “more realistic value” of the subject company; it also affirms ...

‘Outlandish’ Valuation Supports Possibly Frivolous Claims

Case against auditing firm supported by 'outlandish' damages claims.

Maxwell v. KPMG, LLP

Case against auditing firm supported by 'outlandish' damages claims.

1 - 25 of 36 results