BV News and Trends May 2022
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
Two BV Firms Collaborate to Serve Clients Better—and Boost Business
Solo and small-business valuation practitioners can scale up their practices using an idea that two firms have discovered: collaboration. It allows them to take on engagements that they otherwise would have turned away and gives them access to each other’s knowledge, resources, and contacts.
BV News and Trends April 2022
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
Tip: Add an expiration date to an engagement letter
During a very informative—and entertaining—webinar on expert witnessing, Robert Vance (Forensic & Valuation Services PLC), gave this advice: Consider putting an expiration date on the cover letter to your proposed engagement letter.
So You Want to Testify as a Financial Expert Witness? Testimony Tips, Traps and Video Demonstrations From the Trenches
Learn how to testify in bench and jury trials and depositions from a seasoned forensic CPA who has testified in the trenches for 27 years. See video clips from an actual testimony by Robert Vance and from popular TV shows and movies (which are mostly very humorous) to learn how to answer questions and keep your cool. Receive tips on how to construct your litigation-oriented curriculum vitae and engagement letter. Get prepared for subpoenas, Daubert ...
Sources of new business you may overlook
Business valuation professions know that attorneys are a prime source of new engagements, but other sources may not immediately come to mind.
Start due diligence before accepting an engagement
This is one of the tips in an article from the latest journal of the Chartered Business Valuators Institute (CBV Institute), Canada’s valuation professional organization (VPO) and standard-setter.
Larchick v. Pollock
The trial court (TC) in this case excluded the evidence of a business valuation expert because he had submitted a calculation of value report and was then asked to testify to it. The expert self-admitted that he would not testify to a calculation of value and had explained in his engagement letter that a valuation engagement would be required for testimony. Despite the exclusion by the TC and the self-admission of the inadequacy of a calculation of value for testimony purposes, the appellate court nevertheless remanded the case in part to determine whether the calculation of value met the requirements of Arizona Rule 702 for allowable evidence.
Arizona Appeals Court Says a Calculation of Value Is Not Per Se Unacceptable
The trial court (TC) in this case excluded the evidence of a business valuation expert because he had submitted a calculation of value report and was then asked to testify to it. The expert self-admitted that he would not testify to a calculation of value and had explained in his engagement letter that a valuation engagement would be required for testimony. Despite the exclusion by the TC and the self-admission of the inadequacy of a calculation of value for testimony purposes, the appellate court nevertheless remanded the case in part to determine whether the calculation of value met the requirements of Arizona Rule 702 for allowable evidence.
Divorce conference speakers share valuation and legal practice tips
In “25 Hot Tips in 75 Minutes,” one of the most popular panels at the recent AAML/BVR National Divorce Conference in Las Vegas, attorneys and valuation experts shared tips on how to succeed in litigation as well as in managing client relations and workflow.
Calculation engagement value holds up in Alabama divorce litigation
Many valuators are adamantly opposed to doing calculation engagements, as we recently reported.
Appeals Court Validates Trial Court’s Reliance on Calculation of Value
Appeals court rejects claim that expert’s value determination pursuant to a calculation engagement rather than a valuation engagement was unreliable; trial court properly considered limitations inherent in a calculation engagement when crediting expert’s value estimate, appeals court says.
Rohling v. Rohling
Appeals court rejects claim that expert’s value determination pursuant to a calculation engagement rather than a valuation engagement was unreliable; trial court properly considered limitations inherent in a calculation engagement when crediting expert’s value estimate, appeals court says.
Expert Fee Dispute Devolves Into Malpractice Claim
In fee dispute, appeals court affirms trial court’s rejection of disgruntled client’s attempt to defend against accounting firm’s suit with allegations of malpractice; client failed to offer expert testimony to support attack on appraiser’s valuation.
Cohen & Company v. Breen
In fee dispute, appeals court affirms trial court’s rejection of disgruntled client’s attempt to defend against accounting firm’s suit with allegations of malpractice; client failed to offer expert testimony to support attack on appraiser’s valuation.
Using jointly retained business appraisers
The increasing use of jointly retained experts in business valuation matters presents unique opportunities for qualified business appraisers who are aware of the procedures and pitfalls of jointly ...
The 1999/2000 Medical Practice Valuation Guidebook: Including the Influence of Managed Care
In addition to raising the bar on medical practice valuation, Mark Dietrich has written a text on physician practice management that is really three books in one.