Athlon Sports Communications, Inc. v. Duggan (I)
Appeals court says trial court followed applicable law when it used Delaware block method to determine fair value of dissenting shareholders’ interests; court declines to change law on valuation, saying reversal must come from state Supreme Court.
Tennessee Sticks With Delaware Block Method in Judicial Appraisals
Appeals court says trial court followed applicable law when it used Delaware block method to determine fair value of dissenting shareholders’ interests; court declines to change law on valuation, saying reversal must come from state Supreme Court.
In re OM Group, Inc. Stockholders Litig.
Per business judgment rule, court dismisses shareholder complaint that board members breached fiduciary duties by rushing to sell entire company where financial advisor had stated separate sales of company’s various business units would maximize value.
Shareholder Approval ‘Cleanses’ Potential Undervaluation
Per business judgment rule, court dismisses shareholder complaint that board members breached fiduciary duties by rushing to sell entire company where financial advisor had stated separate sales of company’s various business units would maximize value.
High Court Dissent Rebukes Chancery’s Analysis in Option Valuation Case
In medical company valuation case, high court affirms award to option holders based on deference owed to trial court’s findings of historical fact; dissent says Chancery’s dismissal ...
Persuasive’ Defense Expert Testimony Defeats ESOP Overpayment Claims
Court says defense expert opinion provides “credible and persuasive” support for court’s conclusion that ESOP financial advisor produced sound fairness and valuation opinions prior to contested transaction; there was no overpayment for stock at issue.
Fish v. GreatBanc Trust Co.
Court says defense expert opinion provides “credible and persuasive” support for court’s conclusion that ESOP financial advisor produced sound fairness and valuation opinions prior to contested transaction; there was no overpayment for stock at issue.
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.
Bankruptcy Court’s Going-Concern Valuation Weathers Appeal
In Chapter 7 case, Bankruptcy Court finds trustee expert’s liquidation valuation fails to meet insolvency tests; court says expert’s substantial discounting of debtor’s assets is based on mistaken assumption and incompatible with going-concern valuation.
Bankruptcy Court’s Going-Concern Valuation Weathers Appeal
In Chapter 7 case, district court upholds Bankruptcy Court’s insolvency determination, which was a predicate to many of trustee’s claims; reviewing court says evidence supports use of going-concern valuation and rejection of liquidation discount.
Flawed Lost Profits Analysis Leaves Plaintiff Bereft of Damages Evidence
Court excludes damages opinion where expert relied on historical data from one construction project to calculate lost profits for subject project without establishing comparability as to type of contract and scope of work and by using “ad hoc” method.
Chancery Rejects Deal Price Based on Unquantifiable ‘Sales Process Mispricing’
For statutory appraisal, Chancery says sales process related to management buyout “functioned imperfectly as a price discovery tool” and gives no weight to final merger price; court relies exclusively on DCF analysis to derive fair value of the company.
In re ISN Software Corp. Appraisal Litig.
Chancery finds gap separating fair value determinations of three valuation experts in a merger involving a privately held company “alarmingly” wide; court says only the DCF, “a simple and powerful concept,” achieves a reliable indicator of fair value.
Chancery Relies on ‘Simple and Powerful’ DCF for Fair Value
Chancery finds gap separating fair value determinations of three valuation experts in a merger involving a privately held company “alarmingly” wide; court says only the DCF, “a simple and powerful concept,” achieves a reliable indicator of fair value.
In Unusual ESOP Case, 5th Circuit Validates FMV Computation
5th Circuit upholds district court’s liability and remedy findings in ESOP case; lower court’s weighting and averaging of valuation results offered by parties’ experts to compute amount of overpayment “was founded in established valuation methodology.”
In re DFC Global Corp.
Court says uncertainty about company’s future performance and viability limits reliability of values derived from DCF and multiples-based comparable company analyses as well as deal price; court blends three “imperfect techniques” to determine fair value.
Chancery Achieves Fair Value by Blending Three ‘Imperfect Techniques’
Court says uncertainty about company’s future performance and viability limits reliability of values derived from DCF and multiples-based comparable company analyses as well as deal price; court blends three “imperfect techniques” to determine fair value.
Cdx Holdings, Inc. v. Fox (Fox II)
In medical company valuation case, high court affirms award to option holders based on deference owed to trial court’s findings of historical fact; dissent says Chancery’s dismissal of board members’ valuation testimony evinces Chancery’s hindsight bias.
High Court Dissent Rebukes Chancery’s Analysis in Option Valuation Case
In medical company valuation case, high court affirms award to option holders based on deference owed to trial court’s findings of historical fact; dissent says Chancery’s dismissal ...
In re Appraisal of Dell Inc.
For statutory appraisal, Chancery says sales process related to management buyout “functioned imperfectly as a price discovery tool” and gives no weight to final merger price; court relies exclusively on DCF analysis to derive fair value of the company.
Defendant’s Obfuscatory Tactics to Preclude Expert Testimony Fail
Court rejects defendant’s relevance attack on plaintiff expert’s opinion, noting under Daubert testimony need not “fit” a particular cause of action but is relevant where it assesses damages based on harm to plaintiff caused by defendant’s misconduct.
RMS of Wisconsin, Inc. v. S-K JV
Court excludes damages opinion where expert relied on historical data from one construction project to calculate lost profits for subject project without establishing ...
Perez v. Bruister (II)
5th Circuit upholds district court’s liability and remedy findings in ESOP case; lower court’s weighting and averaging of valuation results offered by parties’ experts to compute amount of overpayment “was founded in established valuation methodology.”
Burtch v. Opus, LLC (In re Opus East, LLC) (II)
In Chapter 7 case, district court upholds Bankruptcy Court’s insolvency determination, which was a predicate to many of trustee’s claims; reviewing court says evidence supports use of going-concern valuation and rejection of liquidation discount.
Court Excludes Pro Forma-Based Economic Damages Analysis
Court excludes plaintiffs’ DCF-based damages calculation, finding it suffers from “garbage-in, garbage-out” problem; plaintiffs’ experts based cash flow analysis on defendant’s preliminary projections rather than subsequently available actual sales data.