Granada v. Rojas
In this Ohio divorce case, the appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court to accept the value of the husband’s expert ($291,100) and reject the value of the wife’s expert ($840,000) as to the value of the marital business, an environmental remediation company. The husband’s value was well supported by the evidence.
Appellate Court (Ohio) Affirms Trial Court’s Acceptance of Husband’s Expert’s Value of Marital Business and Rejects Wife’s Expert’s Value
In this Ohio divorce case, the appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court to accept the value of the husband’s expert ($291,100) and reject the value of the wife’s expert ($840,000) as to the value of the marital business, an environmental remediation company. The husband’s value was well supported by the evidence.
Basic assumption drives valuers way apart
In an Illinois divorce case, different fundamental assumptions about the husband’s picture frame business yielded greatly disparate values from the two experts.
In re Rozdolsky
In this complex Illinois divorce case, the appellate court affirmed the valuation of the husband’s business. The trial court had already reduced the wife’s expert’s valuation by 30%. Overall, the husband raised nine issues on appeal, including having to contribute to the wife’s attorney’s and expert fees, resulting from the husband’s lack of cooperation in discovery.
Illinois Appellate Court Affirms Valuation of Marital Business
In this complex Illinois divorce case, the appellate court affirmed the valuation of the husband’s business. The trial court had already reduced the wife’s expert’s valuation by 30%. Overall, the husband raised nine issues on appeal, including having to contribute to the wife’s attorney’s and expert fees, resulting from the husband’s lack of cooperation in discovery.
Valuation of business hit by COVID-19 in recent divorce case
If you haven’t done so already, sooner or later you will value a business affected by COVID-19.
Dawson v. Dawson
The court of appeals, in an Arizona divorce case, affirmed the decision of the Superior Court to accept the wife’s expert’s value of the husband’s business. The wife’s expert used a three-year look back average of cash flows, while the husband’s expert utilized the most current year’s cash flow.
Court Chooses Three-Year Average Cash Flow Over Single to Determine Value of Husband’s Business—Appellate Court Affirms
The court of appeals, in an Arizona divorce case, affirmed the decision of the Superior Court to accept the wife’s expert’s value of the husband’s business. The wife’s expert used a three-year look back average of cash flows, while the husband’s expert utilized the most current year’s cash flow.
Tales From the Trenches: How Recent Challenges with the IRS Impact Your Valuation
With a special focus on the recent Aaron U. Jones (USTC TCM 2019-101) case regarding tax affecting an S corp and a partnership, this workshop is the best way to get IRS insights short of going into litigation. Get real insights on how to avoid and what to do if working with the IRS on business valuation issues at all levels. Join Mike Gregory as he dives into conflict resolution (with assistance from the Collaboration ...
Court Says Expulsion Price Determination in Louisiana Buyout Dispute Is Triable Issue
In buyout dispute resulting from expulsion of LLC member, court finds state law does not preclude use of discounts in valuing withdrawing LLC member’s interest; company’s operating agreement is ambiguous on how to value expelled member’s interest, court says, leaving issue for jury to decide.
Complete Logistical Services, LLC v. Rulh
In buyout dispute resulting from expulsion of LLC member, court finds state law does not preclude use of discounts in valuing withdrawing LLC member’s interest; company’s operating agreement is ambiguous on how to value expelled member’s interest, court says, leaving issue for jury to decide.
Alabama divorce court adopts result of calculation engagement
There is a split in the valuation community as to the merit of calculation engagements. As we recently reported, some valuators are adamantly opposed to doing them, whereas other appraisers believe that calculation engagements have a rightful place in their tool kit.
Court of Chancery disregards deal price where sales process is not ‘Dell compliant’
Recent rulings from the Delaware Supreme Court make it seem as if the discounted cash flow analysis has lost its top ranking among valuation methodologies in statutory appraisals involving publicly traded companies. Not exactly.
Management forecasts receive close scrutiny from courts
In assessing the soundness of valuations, courts in a variety of cases have been paying close attention to the management projections appraisers have used or decided not to use in performing their value analyses. If courts are scrutinizing projections for reliability and plausibility, experts hoping to prevail in the litigation context must do so as well.
Tax Court's Koons decision withstands appeal: DLOM ruling anchors valuation
The 11th Circuit recently affirmed a four-year-old Tax Court valuation of a revocable trust’s interest in a limited partnership. The linchpin in the valuation was the marketability discount.
Valuation of key marital asset demands expert opinion
In a Mississippi divorce, the husband's sole-owned fitness training company was the key asset. An accurate valuation was central to achieving an equitable distribution of property, but the parties did not hire experts or even submit much financial information to the trial court.
Chancery achieves fair value with three imperfect valuation techniques
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Perhaps Chancellor Bouchard thought of Aristotle when he recently ruled in a statutory appraisal action that, even though the results of three common valuation techniques were unreliable indicators of value, in combination they established fair value.
Why Del. Chancery rejects merger price in 'Dell' statutory appraisal action
It decided to give no weight to the final merger price—$13.75 per share, and a special $0.13 dividend issued to all shareholders—but rely exclusively on its own post-transaction DCF analysis to determine the fair value of the company. In so doing, the court deviated from a number of Chancery decisions—several issued in 2015—that found the deal price was the most reliable indicator of the company’s fair value.
Court refuses to take stand on minority discount in buyback of shares
The parties retained a sole appraiser, whom they both knew from past appraisals he had done of the company. Prior to formally engaging the appraiser, in a court hearing, both sides broached the issue of whether it was appropriate to apply a minority discount in valuing the plaintiff's shares. The court declined to weigh in on the subject, but told the parties the minority discount issue should form “part of the discussion” they needed to have over the valuation methodology.
New Jersey DLOM ruling inches ancient dissenting shareholder suit to conclusion
The parties' most recent fight focused on whether the prevailing expert's DCF analysis embedded a marketability discount to account for illiquidity. If not, the trial court had to decided what the appropriate DLOM rate was. The plaintiff-selling shareholder argued in favor of a zero DLOM, the defendants-buying shareholders presented an expert valuation that specified a 35% DLOM, based on the expert's use of a market approach.