Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Lazar v. Mor

The plaintiffs in this business dispute submitted motions to amend their complaint, alleging that the defendants contributed only a fraction of their required capital contributions. The result was, per the plaintiffs, that the defendants were overpaid, and the plaintiffs were shorted millions in distributions from the net proceeds of the sale of the properties.

Motion to Amend for Consideration of Variable Member Interests Granted

The plaintiffs in this business dispute submitted motions to amend their complaint, alleging that the defendants contributed only a fraction of their required capital contributions. The result was, per the plaintiffs, that the defendants were overpaid, and the plaintiffs were shorted millions in distributions from the net proceeds of the sale of the properties.

ES NPA Holding, LLC v. Comm’r

The Tax Court ruled that the class C units were a profits interest because, when applying the fair market value of the LLC at the time of receipt, the partner would not receive any proceeds from a liquidation at that time. Any proceeds in excess of fair market value would be speculative. No accuracy penalty was appropriate either.

On Liquidation Tax Matters, Partner Would Not Receive Any Proceeds, Interest Received Would Be Nontaxable Profits Interest

The Tax Court ruled that the class C units were a profits interest because, when applying the fair market value of the LLC at the time of receipt, the partner would not receive any proceeds from a liquidation at that time. Any proceeds in excess of fair market value would be speculative. No accuracy penalty was appropriate either.

Maher v. Cmejrek

The wife appealed the trial court’s decisions as to the values of the husband’s interests in his various medical practices and clinics and challenged the trial court’s determination of the husband’s income for support purposes. The appellate court affirmed the values of the medical practices and clinics and remanded the determination of income for support purposes for recalculation.

Indiana Appellate Court Affirms Valuation of Medical Practice Interests of Husband but Remands for Recalculation of Husband’s Income for Child Support

The wife appealed the trial court’s decisions as to the values of the husband’s interests in his various medical practices and clinics and challenged the trial court’s determination of the husband’s income for support purposes. The appellate court affirmed the values of the medical practices and clinics and remanded the determination of income for support purposes for recalculation.

Jayawardena v. Daka

This case involved a shareholder dispute among four shareholders of a physician practice (Ferncreek Cardiology PA) and two real estate LLCs. There were buy-sell provisions for each of the three entities. As to Ferncreek, the buy-sell provision was essentially an increase in book value provision, as the regular account determined in “good faith.” Payment provisions were also included in the agreement. The two real estate LLCs had a buy-sell provision that provided for either a single agreed-upon appraiser or three appraisers if no agreement was made. The plaintiff made the decision to exit the practice, triggering the buy-sell provisions. The parties were not able to agree on certain provisions as they worked through the buy-sell agreements. The trial court entered partial summary judgments on some claims of both parties. This appeal dealt with these partial summary judgments and was filed by the plaintiff.

North Carolina Appeals Court Affirms Decisions on Value of Businesses Under Buy-Sell Agreements

This case involved a shareholder dispute among four shareholders of a physician practice (Ferncreek Cardiology PA) and two real estate LLCs. There were buy-sell provisions for each of the three entities. As to Ferncreek, the buy-sell provision was essentially an increase in book value provision, as the regular account determined in “good faith.” Payment provisions were also included in the agreement. The two real estate LLCs had a buy-sell provision that provided for either a single agreed-upon appraiser or three appraisers if no agreement was made. The plaintiff made the decision to exit the practice, triggering the buy-sell provisions. The parties were not able to agree on certain provisions as they worked through the buy-sell agreements. The trial court entered partial summary judgments on some claims of both parties. This appeal dealt with these partial summary judgments and was filed by the plaintiff.

Court’s value of law firm interest KO’d on appeal

No operating agreement and no buy-sell agreement can trigger dragged-out fighting when a member or owner leaves the firm.

Furrer v. Siegel & Rouhana, LLC

A name attorney in a Maryland law firm withdrew after having his license suspended. He sued the firm for compensation for his 26.5% interest in the firm. The firm countersued for damages related to his mistreatment of client accounts. The trial court determined a value of his interest and also determined damages that the attorney owed the firm for his mistreatment of client accounts. The appellate court affirmed the damages but remanded the valuation of the 26.5% interest.

Maryland Appellate Court Remands for Valuation of Withdrawing Member’s Interest in Law Firm and Affirms Damages Award

A name attorney in a Maryland law firm withdrew after having his license suspended. He sued the firm for compensation for his 26.5% interest in the firm. The firm countersued for damages related to his mistreatment of client accounts. The trial court determined a value of his interest and also determined damages that the attorney owed the firm for his mistreatment of client accounts. The appellate court affirmed the damages but remanded the valuation of the 26.5% interest.

No valuation adjustment for alleged acts of oppression

In a Connecticut case, four siblings were partners in a number of restaurant properties and one of the partners (who had a 25% interest) was ousted by the others.

Bougie v. Garth-Niggeman

The case originated at trial court on issues of the buyout of a deceased member’s interest in an LLC restaurant. Among the issues was the use of the LLC’s recipes by the acquirer of the deceased’s interest in violation of the operating agreement. The two remaining LLC members claimed the use of the LLC’s recipes in other restaurants irreparably harmed them. However, the remaining members did not seek, nor did they prove, any damages resulting from the use of the recipes. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s denial of a permanent injunction against the use of the recipes.

Trial Court’s Denial of Permanent Injunctive Relief for Irreparable Harm Is Upheld

The case originated at trial court on issues of the buyout of a deceased member’s interest in an LLC restaurant. Among the issues was the use of the LLC’s recipes by the acquirer of the deceased’s interest in violation of the operating agreement. The two remaining LLC members claimed the use of the LLC’s recipes in other restaurants irreparably harmed them. However, the remaining members did not seek, nor did they prove, any damages resulting from the use of the recipes. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s denial of a permanent injunction against the use of the recipes.

Discounts inappropriate under controlling agreement, appeals court finds

In a buyout dispute involving a limited liability company, the Oregon Court of Appeals recently overturned a trial court’s decision to apply discounts when valuing the departing member’s minority interest.

Tax Court Allows for ‘Slight’ Discount for Lack of Control for Majority Interests in Real Estate Holding Companies

In a gift and estate tax dispute, the estate and Internal Revenue Service agreed to apply discounts for lack of control and marketability to the majority interests in a number of real estate holding companies. The U.S. Tax Court noted that, in prior decisions, the court found no discount for lack of control applied. However, given the parties’ agreement, here, the court said it would apply a “slight” or “low” discount.

Estate of Warne v. Commissioner

In a gift and estate tax dispute, the estate and Internal Revenue Service agreed to apply discounts for lack of control and marketability to the majority interests in a number of real estate holding companies. The U.S. Tax Court noted that, in prior decisions, the court found no discount for lack of control applied. However, given the parties’ agreement, here, the court said it would apply a “slight” or “low” discount.

Gavrielidis v. 80 Seaview Ave., LLC

In this dispute among siblings owning restaurants in Connecticut, the court determined that there was no oppression against one of the siblings whose employment was terminated and there were no wrongful acts. The court determined the fair market value of the plaintiff’s membership interests but denied discounts for lack of control and lack of marketability.

In a Siblings Ownership Dispute, Court Decides No Oppression and No Sums Owed by the Plaintiff, Determines the Value of the Plaintiff’s 25% Interest

In this dispute among siblings owning restaurants in Connecticut, the court determined that there was no oppression against one of the siblings whose employment was terminated and there were no wrongful acts. The court determined the fair market value of the plaintiff’s membership interests but denied discounts for lack of control and lack of marketability.

Nonowner spouse obtains discovery of valuation-related info from owner spouse’s medical practice

A Florida divorce case prompted an important discovery ruling from the appellate court as to a nonowner spouse’s right to access documents and information regarding the owner spouse’s interest in a large medical practice.

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.

Namerow v. PediatriCare Associates, LLC

In pediatrician buyout suit, court says practice’s operating agreement requires net worth calculation; court agrees with defense expert’s definition of “net worth” as the value of assets minus liabilities, as stated in the balance sheets, and rejects proposed inclusion of intangible assets.

Court Says Expert’s Inclusion of Intangible Assets Violates Buyout Agreement

In pediatrician buyout suit, court says practice’s operating agreement requires net worth calculation; court agrees with defense expert’s definition of “net worth” as the value of assets minus liabilities, as stated in the balance sheets, and rejects proposed inclusion of intangible assets.

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.

1 - 25 of 37 results