Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Connecticut Supreme Court clarifies double-counting rule

In a recent decision, the Connecticut Supreme Court clarified this jurisdiction approach to double counting (or double dipping).

Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (II)

In this divorce case, the Connecticut Supreme Court, overturning the appellate court, clarifies that awarding the nonowner spouse part of the value of the owner spouse’s businesses and basing alimony on income generated from the businesses is not impermissible double counting (double dipping).

Connecticut Supreme Court Clarifies Double Counting Rule in Divorce Cases Involving Valuation of a Business and Determination of Alimony

In this divorce case, the Connecticut Supreme Court, overturning the appellate court, clarifies that awarding the nonowner spouse part of the value of the owner spouse’s businesses and basing alimony on income generated from the businesses is not impermissible double counting (double dipping).

In Buyout Dispute, Appeals Court Finds There Was No Basis for Jury to Set Aside Appraisers’ Contractually Mandated Value Determination

In buyout dispute, appeals court reverses trial court’s judgment, finding it was based on jury’s erroneous decision to set aside a contractually mandated appraisal and provide its own buyout price; there was no indication the appraisers misinterpreted the controlling partnership agreement; court remands.

Parrish v. Schroering

In buyout dispute, appeals court reverses trial court’s judgment, finding it was based on jury’s erroneous decision to set aside a contractually mandated appraisal and provide its own buyout price; there was no indication the appraisers misinterpreted the controlling partnership agreement; court remands ...

On double-dip issue, Ohio appeals court agrees with Gallo analysis

A recent Ohio appeals court decision expressly agreed with its sister court’s 2015 ruling in Gallo that state law does not prohibit double dipping but does require the trial court to avoid unfairness in distributing marital assets and determining spousal support.

Ohio Court Affirms Facts of Case Don’t Require ‘Double-Dipping Offset’

Ohio appeals court upholds trial court’s spousal support determination based on husband’s average, rather than normalized, income, finding “equity did not require a double-dipping offset”; court agrees with sister court’s ruling in Gallo that applicable statute does not prohibit double dipping.

Kim v. Kim

Ohio appeals court upholds trial court’s spousal support determination based on husband’s average, rather than normalized, income, finding “equity did not require a double-dipping offset”; court agrees with sister court’s ruling in Gallo that applicable statute does not prohibit double dipping.

Washington appeals court issues key ruling on entity goodwill

In a “complicated” (court’s word) dissolution case, the Washington Court of Appeals recently made an important ruling on whether a professional limited liability company (PLLC) can have goodwill separate from the goodwill of the professionals.

McLelland v. Paxton

In dissolution dispute, appeals court affirms trial court’s finding, based on plaintiff expert testimony, that dissolved professional LLC had entity goodwill at trial based, in large part, on ownership of three leases and operation of offices that doctors could use upon termination of partnership.

Washington State Appeals Court Adopts Rule on Entity Goodwill in Professional LLC

In dissolution dispute, appeals court affirms trial court’s finding, based on plaintiff expert testimony, that dissolved professional LLC had entity goodwill at trial based, in large part, on ownership of three leases and operation of offices that doctors could use upon termination of partnership.

Connecticut Appellate Court Remands Because of Impermissible Double Dipping

Appellate court remands because of trial court’s impermissible double dipping, where trial court awarded wife half of the fair market value of husband’s two solely owned businesses, which represented husband’s sole income stream, and based spousal support on annual income generated by businesses.

Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (I)

Appellate court remands because of trial court’s impermissible double dipping, where trial court awarded wife half of the fair market value of husband’s two solely owned businesses, which represented husband’s sole income stream, and based spousal support on annual income generated by businesses.

Trustee’s Attack on Merger Projections Fails to Resonate With Court

Court says trustee fails to show debtor was insolvent under any applicable financial condition tests; contemporaneous industry analysis and valuations by financing banks belie claim that management projections in support of merger were unreasonable.

Brusach v. Brusach

In divorce case featuring veterinary practice, appeals court finds trial court did not err when it did not differentiate between personal and enterprise goodwill and trial court’s spousal support determination did not represent unlawful double dipping.

Court Declines to Set Firm Rules on Goodwill and Double Dipping

In divorce case featuring veterinary practice, appeals court finds trial court did not err when it did not differentiate between personal and enterprise goodwill and trial court’s spousal support determination did not represent unlawful double dipping.

Trustee’s Attack on Merger Projections Fails to Resonate With Court

Court says trustee fails to show debtor was insolvent under any applicable financial condition tests; contemporaneous industry analysis and valuations by financing banks belie claim that management projections in support of merger were unreasonable.

Weisfelner v. Blavatnik (In re Lyondell Chem. Co.)

Court says trustee fails to show debtor was insolvent under any applicable financial condition tests; contemporaneous industry analysis and valuations by financing banks belie claim that management projections in support of merger were unreasonable.

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.

No Place for DLOM and Tax Affecting in N.Y. Fair Value Determination

In statutory fair value proceeding to enable buyout of minority interest in limited liability companies, New York court says prevailing expert opinion understates future income stream; court upward adjusts by eliminating DLOM and disallowing tax affecting ...

Verghetta v. Lawlor

In statutory fair value proceeding to enable buyout of minority interest in limited liability companies, New York court says prevailing expert opinion understates future income stream; court upward adjusts by eliminating DLOM and disallowing tax affecting ...

Service Business Valuation Triggers Double-Dip Rule

New York appellate court finds trial court’s spousal support determination violated double counting rule where expert valued husband’s solely owned engineering company based on an income approach and the business was a service business.

Court Nixes Double-Dip Claim Based on Accounts Receivable Treatment

Appeals court rejects claim that accounts receivable used in asset-based business valuation by wife’s expert are analogous to future income stream for purposes of arguing double dip in light of income determination for spousal support award.

Gifford v Gifford

New York appellate court finds trial court’s spousal support determination violated double counting rule where expert valued husband’s solely owned engineering company based on an income approach and the business was a service business.

1 - 25 of 40 results