Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Business Valuation Case Law Yearbook, 2023 Edition

January 2023 PDF, Softcover (195 pages)

BVR (editor)

Business Valuation Resources, LLC

The legal coverage and in-depth analysis from the BVR legal team including an Introduction by Jim Alerding, BVR Legal Editor delivers lessons learned to help appraisers reach better and more defensible valuation conclusions. The 2023 Yearbook illustrates how financial experts helped their side win (and lose) in the courtroom and includes 70 new cases were added to BVLaw in 2022.  Learn more >>

Most States Reject Discounts in Appraisals and Oppression Cases—But There Are Important Exceptions

This article discusses, on a state-by-state basis, the rejection and acceptance of discounts for minority interest and lack of marketability in appraisals and in oppression and voluntary withdrawal cases. Discounts for lack of marketability at the shareholder level are rejected in most jurisdictions, but some states, including California and New York, still permit them.

Court sets fair value of 50% interest in realty firm

In Connecticut, a real estate firm had a shareholder agreement that allowed for an independent appraisal if one of the owners wanted out.

BV News and Trends November 2022

A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.

Prevailing expert comments on ‘moonshine’ case

In an earlier issue, we reported on an appellate court case involving the valuation of an owner’s one-third share in a Tennessee moonshine distillery (click here for the prior coverage).

Buccieri v. New Hope Realty, Inc.

This case arose out of a dispute between the surviving family and a trustee of the founders of New Hope Realty Inc. The parties could not agree on the management and operations of New Hope Realty. On July 7, 2020, a dissolution proceeding was commenced. The defendants elected to purchase the plaintiffs’ shares. Subsequently, the parties could not agree as to the fair value of the plaintiffs’ interest. The plaintiffs asked the court to determine the value. The court held hearings including testimony from expert witnesses from both parties and determined the fair value.

Court Determines Fair Value of 50% Interest in Real Estate Company—Parties Could Not Agree on Value

This case arose out of a dispute between the surviving family and a trustee of the founders of New Hope Realty Inc. The parties could not agree on the management and operations of New Hope Realty. On July 7, 2020, a dissolution proceeding was commenced. The defendants elected to purchase the plaintiffs’ shares. Subsequently, the parties could not agree as to the fair value of the plaintiffs’ interest. The plaintiffs asked the court to determine the value. The court held hearings including testimony from expert witnesses from both parties and determined the fair value.

Tennessee moonshine formula caught up in business divorce

A partner in a Tennessee distillery making flavored moonshine felt the other two partners improperly disaffiliated him.

Another big win for ESOP valuations vs. the DOL

Valuation experts have long maintained that the Department of Labor (DOL) has been playing by its own valuation rules in its aggressive enforcement of ESOPs—rules that are not consistent with accepted valuation standards. But a court has rejected the valuations the DOL did in a case alleging that an ESOP overvalued (and thus overpaid for) the stock of its sponsoring company.

A Tennessee Appellate Court Affirms the Allowance of a DLOM and Affirms Calculations Under the Income Approach

This case revolved around the value to be paid for a one-third interest in a business partnership for a business that produces and sells flavored “moonshine” liquor. The trial court initially resolved all issues and determined that the plaintiff was entitled to the fair value of his one-third interest in the partnership. Defendant appealed, among other things, the trial court determination of value for his interest. The appellate court remanded for elimination of the discount for lack of control. On this appeal, the plaintiff disagreed with the trial court value and believed the DLOM should also be eliminated. The appellate court affirmed the trial court. The value affirmed was a conclusion of value issued in a summary report.

Boesch v. Holeman (II)

This case revolved around the value to be paid for a one-third interest in a business partnership for a business that produces and sells flavored “moonshine” liquor. The trial court initially resolved all issues and determined that the plaintiff was entitled to the fair value of his one-third interest in the partnership. Defendant appealed, among other things, the trial court determination of value for his interest. The appellate court remanded for elimination of the discount for lack of control. On this appeal, the plaintiff disagreed with the trial court value and believed the DLOM should also be eliminated. The appellate court affirmed the trial court. The value affirmed was a conclusion of value issued in a summary report.

Global BV News: Takeover premiums in Canada increased in the first half of 2022

The median takeover premium of Canadian public companies in the first half of 2022 was 40%, a 7% increase from the prior year, according to “Canadian M&A Insights” (Summer 2022) from Kroll.

Highlights From the 2022 NYSSCPA BVLS Conference

Money laundering, earnouts, valuing debt, and SPAC enforcement are a few of the topics presented at the Business Valuation and Litigation Services (BVLS) conference hosted by the New York State Society of CPAs. Here are some key takeaways.

No discounts in New Jersey shareholder buyout case

New Jersey is one of several states that allow discounts for lack of control and marketability in fair value situations if it is proven that the discounts are fair and equitable, but, in a recent case, the trial court disallowed the discounts—and an appellate court agreed.

BV News and Trends June 2022

A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.

BV News and Trends May 2022

A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.

Highlights from the NYSSCPA BV conference

BVWire attended the New York State Society of CPAs’ Business Valuation and Litigation Services Conference, and—as always—it was an excellent event.

Estate and Gift: The Complete Valuation Package (A BVR Workshop)

Unwrap all things estate and gift in this engaging session with Marissa Turrell and Carla Glass. This presentation will assume a basic understanding of business valuation, of both operating companies and holding companies, and focus on specifics related to valuing ownership interests for estate and gift purposes. Some topics will focus on issues that arise only in valuation for gift and estate purposes, such as seminal court cases on the matter, Chapter 14, working with ...

Robertson v. Hyde Park

This case was a partnership dispute where the defendant partners tried to buy out the plaintiff partners. On appeal before the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, the defendants argued that the plaintiffs’ dissociation was wrongful and damages should be assessed, discounts for lack of control and marketability should be applied to the value, and the partnership value should be reduced to account for partnership outstanding debts and other amounts. The plaintiffs argued that the trial court erred by relying on the defendants’ expert’s report and not their expert’s report, refusing to increase the value by personal loans taken by the defendant partners, and failing to find that the partnership overpaid management and accounting fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court with one exception, whether the partnership agreement disassociated properly. On that count, the appellate court determined that the disassociation was appropriate.

New Jersey Appellate Court Affirms Valuation of Shopping Mall, Disallows Any Control or Marketability Discounts, Affirms Proper Dissociation by Plaintiffs

This case was a partnership dispute where the defendant partners tried to buy out the plaintiff partners. On appeal before the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, the defendants argued that the plaintiffs’ dissociation was wrongful and damages should be assessed, discounts for lack of control and marketability should be applied to the value, and the partnership value should be reduced to account for partnership outstanding debts and other amounts. The plaintiffs argued that the trial court erred by relying on the defendants’ expert’s report and not their expert’s report, refusing to increase the value by personal loans taken by the defendant partners, and failing to find that the partnership overpaid management and accounting fees. The appellate court affirmed the trial court with one exception, whether the partnership agreement disassociated properly. On that count, the appellate court determined that the disassociation was appropriate.

Updated versions of two closed-end fund reports for estimating DLOC

Closed-end fund (CEF) data are commonly used to derive discounts for lack of control (DLOC) for closely held holding companies invested in marketable securities.

No valuation adjustment for alleged acts of oppression

In a Connecticut case, four siblings were partners in a number of restaurant properties and one of the partners (who had a 25% interest) was ousted by the others.

AICPA offers free webcast on estate/gift valuations

A two-and-a half-hour webcast on estate and gift valuations is available free of charge from the AICPA.

New Case Points Up Opportunity for Buy-Sell Valuations

A recent court case illustrates that many buy-sell agreements do not adequately address the issue of valuation when an owner exits the firm. This represents an opportunity for valuation experts to review clients’ buy-sell agreements to identify potential problems, which could mean recurring business for the practice.

BV News and Trends January 2021

A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.

26 - 50 of 427 results