Court Concludes Plaintiff Cannot Satisfy Three-Part New York Lost Profits Test
Court says plaintiff fails New York test for lost profits; plaintiff lacks coherent damages theory and, by its own admission, is unable to do more than speculate about future profitability; expert calculation represents “the sort of conjecture the reasonable certainty standard prohibits.”
MY Imagination v. M.Z. Berger & Co. (I)
Court says plaintiff fails New York test for lost profits; plaintiff lacks coherent damages theory and, by its own admission, is unable to do more than speculate about future profitability; expert calculation represents “the sort of conjecture the reasonable certainty standard prohibits.”
Florida Supreme Court negates legislature’s adoption of Daubert
In 2013, the Florida legislature amended the Florida code, section 90.702, dealing with expert testimony, to incorporate the Daubert standard in the state’s rules of evidence.
5th Circuit Upholds Tax Court’s Characterization of Interest and Discount Rulings
In estate tax dispute, Tax Court agrees with IRS that decedent transferred limited partner interest, not assignee interest, to revocable trust; under partnership agreement, limited partner had rights not available to assignee; court rejects discount for lack of control and adopts IRS’ DLOM rate.
Estate of Streightoff v. Commissioner (I)
In estate tax dispute, Tax Court agrees with IRS that decedent transferred limited partner interest, not assignee interest, to revocable trust; under partnership agreement, limited partner had rights not available to assignee; court rejects discount for lack of control and adopts IRS’ DLOM rate.
New Jersey closer to Daubert but still not a Daubert jurisdiction
A decision from the Supreme Court recently led New Jersey to adopt key Daubert factors for determining the admissibility of expert testimony, but the high court’s ruling also expresses a reluctance to fully embrace the Daubert standard.
Congressional members accuse DOL of undermining ESOPs
As reported by the ESOP Association, in a letter to the White House dated October 1, 27 members of Congress (including one who identified as a CPA) have voiced serious concerns about the DOL’s “investigatory and enforcement policies toward Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs).”
New Jersey adopts key Daubert factors for expert admissibility determination
In an important ruling, the New Jersey Supreme Court recently took a big step toward Daubert but failed to embrace it completely.
Appeals Court Upholds Tax Court’s Section 1031 Decision Pivoting on ‘Tainted Appraisals’
Appeals court upholds Tax Court’s ruling that taxpayer’s transactions do not represent section 1031 like-kind exchanges because taxpayer never assumed ownership of replacement plants; improper input from taxpayer’s law firm tainted appraisals used to show otherwise; accuracy penalty is justified.
Exelon Corp. v. Commissioner
Appeals court upholds Tax Court’s ruling that taxpayer’s transactions do not represent section 1031 like-kind exchanges because taxpayer never assumed ownership of replacement plants; improper input from taxpayer’s law firm tainted appraisals used to show otherwise; accuracy penalty is justified.
In Memory of Tax Court Judge David Laro
BVR is very sad to note that the eminent David Laro, a senior judge of the United States Tax Court, passed away on September 21. Valuators in particular looked up to Judge Laro for his unique understanding of the field of valuation and the role it plays in many tax cases.
Daubert Ruling on How to Satisfy Apportionment When Using Benchmark Licenses
Court finds plaintiff expert’s lost profits calculation regarding two-supplier market is inadmissible and rejects reasonable royalty to the extent expert failed to explain how apportionment in benchmark licenses relates to expert’s hypothetical license.
Bio Rad Labs. v. 10X Genomics, Inc. (I)
Court finds plaintiff expert’s lost profits calculation regarding two-supplier market is inadmissible and rejects reasonable royalty to the extent expert failed to explain how apportionment in benchmark licenses relates to expert’s hypothetical license.
In memory of Tax Court Judge David Laro
BVR is very sad to note that the eminent David Laro, a senior judge of the United States Tax Court, passed away on September 21.
Courts are alert to valuations unmoored from the facts
Perhaps experts feel pressure from the hiring attorney or the client, perhaps they are unable to access key documents or information, or perhaps they simply lack valuation and litigation experience.
Calculation engagement value holds up in Alabama divorce litigation
Many valuators are adamantly opposed to doing calculation engagements, as we recently reported.
Tennessee embraces ‘modern’ valuation methods in fair value determination
In a key valuation decision, the Tennessee Supreme Court recently overruled precedent on how to determine fair value in a dissenting shareholder suit.
Medtronic, Inc. v. Commissioner (II)
8th Circuit says Tax Court failed to do the required comparability analysis between selected uncontrolled license arrangement and contested intercompany licenses, making it impossible to say whether CUT was the best method for calculating arm’s-length royalty rates in transfer pricing case.
Court Looks to Owner’s ‘Proportionate’ Share in Business to Quantify Appreciation in Value
In quantifying marital portion of appreciation of owner spouse’s separate property, trial court relies on owner’s “proportionate” share in company but also considers expert testimony as to third parties’ efforts and owner’s role in generating revenue; court rejects passive factor analysis.
Herbert v. Joubert
In quantifying marital portion of appreciation of owner spouse’s separate property, trial court relies on owner’s “proportionate” share in company but also considers expert testimony as to third parties’ efforts and owner’s role in generating revenue; court rejects passive factor analysis.
Expert’s Detailed Risk Analysis Bolsters Use of Deep Discount in Law Firm Valuation
In buyout dispute over law firm interest, court credits firm’s expert, noting his extensive relevant experience, his taking care to value interest under fair market value standard, as required by the partnership agreement, and his detailed risk analysis to support a deep discount.
Fredericks Peebles & Morgan LLP v. Assam
In buyout dispute over law firm interest, court credits firm’s expert, noting his extensive relevant experience, his taking care to value interest under fair market value standard, as required by the partnership agreement, and his detailed risk analysis to support a deep discount.
Lack of Facts and Data Render Expert’s Fair Value Balance Sheet Not Helpful
Bankruptcy Court excludes as unreliable and irrelevant expert’s solvency opinion and balance sheet; court says expert lacked the facts and data necessary to enact his chosen method and “failed in numerous ways” to reliably apply the facts and data in accordance with the selected method.
Weinman v. Crowley (In re Blair)
Bankruptcy Court excludes as unreliable and irrelevant expert’s solvency opinion and balance sheet; court says expert lacked the facts and data necessary to enact his chosen method and “failed in numerous ways” to reliably apply the facts and data in accordance with the selected method.
DOL backs judgment against trustee in Brundle ESOP litigation
In the fiercely litigated Brundle v. Wilmington Trust ESOP case, in which the district court concluded the ESOP trustee had caused the plan to overpay by almost $29.8 million, the trustee has appealed and outside interests have started to weigh in.