Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Athea v. Athea

In this divorce case, the Florida appellate court upheld the trial court’s acceptance of the husband’s valuation expert including the exclusion of personal goodwill. The court found the valuation and exclusion well supported by evidence and thereby will not be reversed. The court remanded the determination of monthly income of the wife.

Appellate Court Upholds Exclusion of Personal Goodwill—Well Supported

In this divorce case, the Florida appellate court upheld the trial court’s acceptance of the husband’s valuation expert including the exclusion of personal goodwill. The court found the valuation and exclusion well supported by evidence and thereby will not be reversed. The court remanded the determination of monthly income of the wife.

Power Panel: Trends and Issues in Business Valuation

The panel provides an overview of some of the hottest topics in the business valuation profession. Among the topics are: artificial intelligence; environmental, social, and governance (ESG); Department of Labor adequate compensation (ESOP) update; Daubert challenges; federal rules applicable to valuation/litigation experts; interesting case decisions/case law update; market multiples and trends in M discount for lack of marketability—trends and tools; lease accounting and business valuation; trending tax considerations; and cryptocurrency valuation issues. The Power Panel ...

Wee v. Yangzhou Putian Shoemaking Co. (In re Unimex Corp.)

An expert’s report on debtor’s insolvency was excluded under Fed. R. Evid. 702 because the expert’s 50% discount of inventory value was a flawed assumption given that the debtor was not being liquidated and was not on its deathbed, but instead was a going concern.

Expert’s Testimony Is Excluded as to Solvency—Adjustments to the Balance Sheet of Debtor Were Inappropriate

An expert’s report on debtor’s insolvency was excluded under Fed. R. Evid. 702 because the expert’s 50% discount of inventory value was a flawed assumption given that the debtor was not being liquidated and was not on its deathbed, but instead was a going concern.

Bergquist v. Bergquist

The appellate court (Indiana) found that the circuit court abused its discretion when valuing the wife’s business by not determining a value based on there being no evidence that would support such a value. The appellate court remanded the issue of the value of the business for determination based on evidence that would support it.

Indiana Appellate Court Remands to Revalue Wife’s Business Supported by the Evidence

The appellate court (Indiana) found that the circuit court abused its discretion when valuing the wife’s business by not determining a value based on there being no evidence that would support such a value. The appellate court remanded the issue of the value of the business for determination based on evidence that would support it.

BV News and Trends March 2024

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

Court figures fair value of startup biotech for dissenters

In a dissenting shareholder case in a federal district court in Georgia, neither the Black-Scholes method nor the prior transactions method convinced a court of the value of a startup biotech company.

In re Marriage of Bornhofen

In this Illinois divorce case, the trial court adopted the value of the husband’s expert as to the value of the husband’s business and rejected the wife’s expert’s value. The trial court determined that the husband’s expert’s value was the only credible value. The wife sought to introduce additional valuation evidence, which the trial court also rejected. The appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court.

Appellate Court (Illinois) Affirms Trial Court’s Rejection of One Expert’s Business Value and Adopts the Other Expert’s Value

In this Illinois divorce case, the trial court adopted the value of the husband’s expert as to the value of the husband’s business and rejected the wife’s expert’s value. The trial court determined that the husband’s expert’s value was the only credible value. The wife sought to introduce additional valuation evidence, which the trial court also rejected. The appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court.

Abeome Corp., Inc. v. Stevens

The parties did not agree on a fair value of the shares in a dissenting shareholder suit. The court, using information in evidence, including expert witness testimony from both parties’ experts, determined the fair value.

U.S. District Court Determines Fair Value of Shares

The parties did not agree on a fair value of the shares in a dissenting shareholder suit. The court, using information in evidence, including expert witness testimony from both parties’ experts, determined the fair value.

Working Effectively With Attorneys (How to Be a Better Expert)

You’ve honed your valuation skills through education, training, and experience and have been educating clients about what their businesses have been worth for years. Now litigation counsel is asking you to educate judges and juries about the economics of a complex commercial dispute. The best way to be an effective expert, in addition to having those well-honed skills, is to gain an understanding of both the litigation forum and the general needs of counsel. This ...

In re Hussain

Both parties appealed this Illinois divorce case. While several issues were appealed, we focus on the value of the business and the determination of debts against the business. Since the trial court was not given any substantial evidence as to the value of the business, it determined the value on its own with limited information. The appellate court affirmed that value. Additionally, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s disallowance of debts against the business.

Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Value of Business Where the Parties Provided No Evidence

Both parties appealed this Illinois divorce case. While several issues were appealed, we focus on the value of the business and the determination of debts against the business. Since the trial court was not given any substantial evidence as to the value of the value of the business, it determined the value on its own with limited information. The appellate court affirmed that value. Additionally, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s disallowance of debts against the business.

California Appellate Court Affirms That the Marital Settlement Agreement Should Not Be Set Aside for Alleged Inadequate Disclosures

The husband and wife entered into a settlement agreement as to their divorce that was included in the trial court’s judgment of dissolution. The wife thereafter asked the trial court to set the agreement aside due to, among other things, the husband’s failure to disclose his ownership interests in various businesses. The appellate court found the evidence for her motion(s) to be lacking and affirmed the trial court.

In re Hettinga

The husband and wife entered into a settlement agreement as to their divorce that was included in the trial court’s judgment of dissolution. The wife thereafter asked the trial court to set the agreement aside due to, among other things, the husband’s failure to disclose his ownership interests in various businesses. The appellate court found the evidence for her motion(s) to be lacking and affirmed the trial court.

Lamm v. Preston

This was a divorce case with a complex set of issues regarding the marital estate and the businesses of the parties. This Supreme Court of Idaho case and opinion related to one of the businesses, Black Sage Acquisition LLC, in which the couple owned 25%. The magistrate court determined the value of Black Sage Acquisition as $163,373 based on fair market value. The remaining value was determined to be personal goodwill. The Supreme Court (Idaho) affirmed the decision of the district court, which upheld the magistrate court.

Idaho Supreme Court Affirms Magistrate Judge’s Opinion Regarding Personal Goodwill

This was a divorce case with a complex set of issues regarding the marital estate and the businesses of the parties. This Supreme Court of Idaho case and opinion related to one of the businesses, Black Sage Acquisition LLC, in which the couple owned 25%. The magistrate court determined the value of Black Sage Acquisition as $163,373 based on fair market value. The remaining value was determined to be personal goodwill. The Supreme Court (Idaho) affirmed the decision of the district court, which upheld the magistrate court.

Walsh v. Vinoskey

This case covered the appellate decisions regarding the well-publicized Vinoskey ESOP case. The appellate court affirmed the district court in deciding that the company owner had extensive knowledge about the company and its prior valuations, and thus it was plausible to infer that “something was off.” There was no clear error in the district court finding that the owner violated ERISA. The appellate court also allowed an offset to damages for the debt the owner forgave.

Court Affirms Violation of ERISA but Allows Offset of Debt Forgiveness in Determining Damages

This case covered the appellate decisions regarding the well-publicized Vinoskey ESOP case. The appellate court affirmed the district court in deciding that the company owner had extensive knowledge about the company and its prior valuations, and thus it was plausible to infer that “something was off.” There was no clear error in the district court finding that the owner violated ERISA. The appellate court also allowed an offset to damages for the debt the owner forgave.

Court Affirms Exclusion of Testimony From Witness as Being Based on Inadmissible Hearsay Evidence

The plaintiffs contended that the trial court erred in granting two defendants motions in limine to exclude evidence of the plaintiffs’ damages. The appellate court affirmed the decisions of the trial court.

HMH Enters. v. TAG Enters.

The plaintiffs contended that the trial court erred in granting two defendants motions in limine to exclude evidence of the plaintiffs’ damages. The appellate court affirmed the decisions of the trial court.

Evaluating and Applying Control Premiums

In recent years, a greater amount of scrutiny has been placed on valuation analysts’ selection and use of control premiums. As a result, there has been a renewed interest in distinguishing acquisition premiums from control premiums and equity premiums from invested capital premiums. Join Timothy Meinhart for a comprehensive discussion of the proper quantification and application of acquisition premiums and control premiums and also learn about the benefits of using market-based invested capital premiums rather ...

1 - 25 of 118 results