Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Wheelabrator Bridgeport, L.P. v. City of Bridgeport

State high court says trial court’s categorical rejection of DCF method to value a special purpose plant for tax assessment purposes is improper where parties’ “experienced and knowledgeable” experts relied on it; court remands for new trial on valuation.

‘Reasonably Equivalent Value’ Analysis Meets FMV Standard, Court Says

On remand, Bankruptcy Court determines sale of plaintiff’s subsidiaries to defendants yielded “reasonably equivalent value” when viewed from objective creditor’s perspective, under FMV standard and without considering debtor’s subjective needs or beliefs.

Uncertainty Over Key Inputs Compromises DCF, Chancery Says

Chancery favors merger price, without synergy adjustment, over DCF-generated value, noting uncertainties over key inputs such as projections, equity risk premium, terminal growth rate as well as the “wildly divergent” DCF results of the parties’ experts.

In re Trulia Stockholder Litig.

In stockholder class action, Chancery declines to approve settlement that requires plaintiffs to agree to broad release of claims in exchange for additional valuation-related information, finding it fails to meet applicable “fair and reasonable” standard.

Destruction of financial evidence trips up guilty party's own experts

As a damages expert, what do you do when your own client has destroyed vital financial information? Two highly educated finance professionals working on a contract case solved this dilemma by relying exclusively on the opposing side's sales projections, only to see their analysis buckle under a Daubert challenge.

Berger v. Berger

Appeals court says nonexpert testimony on a real-world offer to buy owner-spouse’s company was relevant and, therefore, admissible because it provided valuation evidence based on market approach; court remands for rehearing on all valuation testimony.

PECO Logistics, LLC v. Walnut Inv. Partners, L.P.

Court says valuation firm’s determination of value of defendants’ put units accords with agreement to which plaintiff and defendants committed themselves; since contract does not provide for judicial review, court won’t “second-guess” valuator’s judgment.

Wisniewski v. Walsh (Wisniewski II)

In dissenting shareholder suit, appeals court upholds trial court’s finding that prevailing DCF analysis did not account for illiquidity by way of a separate marketability discount, as well as court’s finding that appropriate DLOM rate was 25%.

Hanckel v. Campbell (In re Hanckel)

Court finds debtor’s fraudulently conveyed interest represents a dissociated interest that is held by the estate; appropriate valuation date is date of trial, and DCF analysis, as modified by court, best captures value of the interest at that time.

Chancery Lauds Advisor’s ‘Heroic’ Efforts at Credible DCF

In joint fairness/statutory appraisal action, Chancery finds defendants’ fraud defeated financial advisor’s ability to produce reliable DCF, notwithstanding advisor’s “heroic” efforts to create “the most credible and reliable projections in the case.”

Bruno v. Bozzuto’s, Inc.

Court excludes plaintiffs’ DCF-based damages calculation, finding it suffers from “garbage-in, garbage-out” problem; plaintiffs’ experts based cash flow analysis on defendant’s preliminary projections rather than subsequently available actual sales data.

‘Hybrid’ Approach to Quantify Loss of Beer Franchise Contracts

Court uses hybrid approach to quantify diminished value in business resulting from franchisees’ loss of beer brands; it means determining FMV of franchise contracts by way of DCF and adding loss in value of other assets directly related to loss of brands.

Adjusted Merger Price Superior to Other Valuation Methods

In appraisal arbitrage case, Chancery finds merger price adjusted for synergies is best indicator of fair value of company; dissenter’s DCF value rests on unsound management projections and its comparable transactions analysis uses too few data points.

Merion Capital LP & Merion Capital II LP v. BMC Software

Chancery favors merger price, without synergy adjustment, over DCF-generated value, noting uncertainties over key inputs such as projections, equity risk premium, terminal growth rate as well as the “wildly divergent” DCF results of the parties’ experts.

In re Mercury Companies, Inc. (II)

On remand, Bankruptcy Court determines sale of plaintiff’s subsidiaries to defendants yielded “reasonably equivalent value” when viewed from objective creditor’s perspective, under FMV standard and without considering debtor’s subjective needs or beliefs.

Chancery Decries Accounting Firm’s Compromised Valuation

Chancery says major accounting firm’s merger-related appraisal represents “new low”; to achieve client’s goal of zero corporate tax liability, firm abandoned sound prior approaches and simply copied another accounting firm’s report and called it its own.

Chancery Adopts Merger Price Sans Cost Savings Reduction

Chancery agrees with company expert’s reliance on merger price as best estimate of fair value of company where DCF and comparable companies analyses lack reliable data, but court rejects downward adjustment for purported cost savings related to merger.

In re Dole Food Co. (Dole III)

In joint fairness/statutory appraisal action, Chancery finds defendants’ fraud defeated financial advisor’s ability to produce reliable DCF, notwithstanding advisor’s “heroic” efforts to create “the most credible and reliable projections in the case.”

Tax Court Tacitly Approves of IRS Solvency Assessment

In transferee liability case, solvency experts use gamut of valuation methods to establish when subject became insolvent; Tax Court does not endorse any one approach but appears to give nod to IRS market-based solvency analysis.

Financial Advisor’s ‘Real Client Was the Deal,’ Says Chancery

Chancery says “dropdown” of assets from parent to master limited partnership resulted in overpayment; transaction was enabled by financial advisor that took orders from parent regardless of whether opinion “made sense as a matter of valuation theory.”

Fox v. CDx Holdings

Chancery says major accounting firm’s merger-related appraisal represents “new low”; to achieve client’s goal of zero corporate tax liability, firm abandoned sound prior approaches and simply copied another accounting firm’s report and called it its own.

376 - 400 of 553 results