Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Federal Circuit Majority Says ‘Premium’ License Calculation Includes Noninfringing Products

Court majority says jury award was based on insufficient evidence because expert’s damage theory envisioned a premium freedom-to-operate license based on past sales of noninfringing products; dissent says expert’s hypothetical negotiation reflected real world concerns and supported award.

Bio Rad Labs. v. 10X Genomics, Inc.

Allowing that apportionment is “inherently imprecise,” court says damages expert’s supplemental report shows that the apportionment underlying three benchmark licenses aligns with the expert’s royalty rate in the hypothetical license; expert’s royalty opinion is admissible under Daubert.

Court Rejects Expert’s Reliance on Other Celebrity Royalty Agreements to Develop Damages Analysis

In IP case, appeals court upholds exclusion of expert testimony; one expert’s damages analysis was based on speculative assumptions as to link between increase in defendant’s revenue and infringement; second expert’s analysis was inadmissible, hinging on first expert’s unreliable opinion.

Daubert Ruling on How to Satisfy Apportionment When Using Benchmark Licenses

Allowing that apportionment is “inherently imprecise,” court says damages expert’s supplemental report shows that the apportionment underlying three benchmark licenses aligns with the expert’s royalty rate in the hypothetical license; expert’s royalty opinion is admissible under Daubert.

Olive v. General Nutrition Centers

In IP case, appeals court upholds exclusion of expert testimony; one expert’s damages analysis was based on speculative assumptions as to link between increase in defendant’s revenue and infringement; second expert’s analysis was inadmissible, hinging on first expert’s unreliable opinion.

More on Florida’s decision re: Daubert

As we reported last week, the Florida Supreme Court recently invalidated a 2013 legislative amendment that required courts to use the Daubert standard to assess the admissibility of expert testimony.

Saltzer v. Rolka

In buyout dispute, appellate court upholds trial court’s valuation of company, which applies company-specific risk discount related to uncertain extension of company’s key contract but does not deduct value of personal goodwill attributable to remaining members.

Appellate Court Upholds Use of Risk Discount in Fair Value Determination

In buyout dispute, appellate court upholds trial court’s valuation of company, which applies company-specific risk discount related to uncertain extension of company’s key contract but does not deduct value of personal goodwill attributable to remaining members.

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.”

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.”

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Bio Rad Labs. v. 10X Genomics, Inc.

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.

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.

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.

201 - 225 of 927 results