Computer Consulting
This U.S. industry comprises establishments primarily engaged in planning and designing computer systems that integrate computer hardware, software, and communication technologies. The hardware and software components of the system may be provided by this establishment or company as part of integrated services or may be provided by third parties or vendors. These establishments often install the system and train and support users of the system.
Court Affirms Inclusion of Personal Goodwill in Marital Estate, Decides Trial Court Erred in Granting a Judgment Against Husband’s Business
In this divorce case, the Supreme Court of Wyoming allowed the valuation of the husband’s business, which likely included personal goodwill. It also decided that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it valued the husband’s business or ordered him to make an equalization payment. However, the district court erred in granting a judgment against the husband’s business for the equity payment due the wife since the business was not a party to the divorce action.
Snyder v. Snyder
In this divorce case, the Supreme Court of Wyoming allowed the valuation of the husband’s business, which likely included personal goodwill. It also decided that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it valued the husband’s business or ordered him to make an equalization payment. However, the district court erred in granting a judgment against the husband’s business for the equity payment due the wife since the business was not a party to the divorce action.
Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (II)
In this divorce case, the Connecticut Supreme Court, overturning the appellate court, clarifies that awarding the nonowner spouse part of the value of the owner spouse’s businesses and basing alimony on income generated from the businesses is not impermissible double counting (double dipping).
Connecticut Supreme Court Clarifies Double Counting Rule in Divorce Cases Involving Valuation of a Business and Determination of Alimony
In this divorce case, the Connecticut Supreme Court, overturning the appellate court, clarifies that awarding the nonowner spouse part of the value of the owner spouse’s businesses and basing alimony on income generated from the businesses is not impermissible double counting (double dipping).
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.
Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (I)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Verition Partners Master Fund Ltd. v. Aruba Networks, Inc. (Aruba II)
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.
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. (Aruba I)
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 ...