BV News and Trends March 2024
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
Court figures fair value of startup biotech for dissenters
In a dissenting shareholder case in a federal district court in Georgia, neither the Black-Scholes method nor the prior transactions method convinced a court of the value of a startup biotech company.
Abeome Corp., Inc. v. Stevens
The parties did not agree on a fair value of the shares in a dissenting shareholder suit. The court, using information in evidence, including expert witness testimony from both parties’ experts, determined the fair value.
U.S. District Court Determines Fair Value of Shares
The parties did not agree on a fair value of the shares in a dissenting shareholder suit. The court, using information in evidence, including expert witness testimony from both parties’ experts, determined the fair value.
Musk prevails in lawsuit claiming he meddled in SolarCity deal
In a unanimous 106-page opinion, the Delaware Supreme Court has upheld the Delaware Chancery Court’s judgment in favor of Elon Musk in a case involving Tesla’s acquisition of SolarCity in 2016.
New case involves dispute over company-specific risk
In a Minnesota shareholder buyout matter, the two opposing valuation experts disagreed over the risk associated with customer concentration.
Business Valuation Case Law Yearbook, 2023 Edition
January 2023 PDF, Softcover (195 pages)
BVR (editor)
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
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.
Appeals court affirms modified liquidation value in shareholder dispute
In a Michigan shareholder deadlock case, a special master recommended that a sale of shares from one shareholder to the other would yield more value than if the company were dissolved.
Sipko v. Koger, Inc.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in its second attempt to resolve this long-running shareholder dispute, a “thoroughly chewed apple”, and buyout, reversed the appellate court and remanded the case to the trial court for reinstatement of its valuation of the shareholder’s interest in two businesses and also agreed with the trial court that no marketability discount should be allowed to reduce the amount to be awarded to the plaintiff. The defendants chose not to call their own expert to provide an opinion of the fair value of the shareholder’s interests.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey Accepts Trial Court’s Value of Companies and Denies a Marketability Discount in a Contentious Buyout Dispute
The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in its second attempt to resolve this long-running shareholder dispute, a “thoroughly chewed apple”, and buyout, reversed the appellate court and remanded the case to the trial court for reinstatement of its valuation of the shareholder’s interest in two businesses and also agreed with the trial court that no marketability discount should be allowed to reduce the amount to be awarded to the plaintiff. The defendants chose not to call their own expert to provide an opinion of the fair value of the shareholder’s interests.
Pitsch v. Pitsch Holding Co.
In this shareholder deadlock litigation, the appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court that the solution to the deadlock was to order a buyout of the plaintiffs’ stock by the defendants as opposed to a dissolution of the company. The appellate court also affirmed the use of a modified-liquidation value as providing a value that maximized the value to the individual shareholders.
Michigan Appeals Court Affirms Modified-Liquidation Value in a Shareholder Deadlock Litigation
In this shareholder deadlock litigation, the appellate court affirmed the decision of the trial court that the solution to the deadlock was to order a buyout of the plaintiffs’ stock by the defendants as opposed to a dissolution of the company. The appellate court also affirmed the use of a modified-liquidation value as providing a value that maximized the value to the individual shareholders.
Koch v. Koch
This shareholder dispute case involved two businesses three brothers in Minnesota owned. One of the brothers, Jim Koch, had a falling out with the other two, Randy and Dave Koch. A temporary agreement was made among them in 2006, but subsequently the relationship and actions of the parties deteriorated. In particular, an IRS audit of the two businesses triggered a disagreement as to whether required payments under the agreement had to be tax deductible. Certain actions by the defendants breached the 2006 agreement as determined by a jury resulting in a damages award of $12 million. The court then held a bench trial to determine the value of the two businesses for determining the buyout amount for Jim’s interest in both businesses. Experts for each side testified as to value. The opinion provided a good analysis of the various issues in the methodologies each of the experts used.
Minority Shareholder Receives Award of $12 Million for Breach of Contract, $58 Million Buyout Award for Minority Interest
This shareholder dispute case involved two businesses three brothers in Minnesota owned. One of the brothers, Jim Koch, had a falling out with the other two, Randy and Dave Koch. A temporary agreement was made among them in 2006, but subsequently the relationship and actions of the parties deteriorated. In particular, an IRS audit of the two businesses triggered a disagreement as to whether required payments under the agreement had to be tax deductible. Certain actions by the defendants breached the 2006 agreement as determined by a jury resulting in a damages award of $12 million. The court then held a bench trial to determine the value of the two businesses for determining the buyout amount for Jim’s interest in both businesses. Experts for each side testified as to value. The opinion provided a good analysis of the various issues in the methodologies each of the experts used.
Business Valuation Case Law Yearbook, 2022 Edition
January 2022 PDF, Softcover (177 pages)
BVR (editor)
Business Valuation Resources, LLC
The legal coverage and in-depth analysis from the BVR legal team deliver lessons learned to help appraisers reach better and more defensible valuation conclusions. All the cases featured in this book impart important lessons about applicable legal principles, approved and discredited valuation methodology, and the act (and art) of presenting expert opinions. This must-have collection benefits both the generalist as well as the specialist.
Learn more >>
BVU News and Trends January 2021
A monthly roundup of key developments of interest to business valuation experts.
Global BVU News and Trends January 2021
Business valuation news from a global perspective.
Willamette’s autumn 2020 Insights focuses on transaction services
Transaction-related board advisory services are the focus of the spring 2020 Insights from Willamette Management Associates.
Excelling in Litigation and Dispute-Related Valuations: How to Not Get Caught Bringing a Knife to a Gunfight
Preparing a valuation analysis can be difficult enough, let alone defending it against an opposing party questioning your every move. It is important for valuation experts to know how their valuations may be challenged by other experts and work to effectively address these issues pre-emptively. Presenters Sean Saari and Bob Ranallo discuss how to prepare yourself, and your valuation report, when you know your work will be subject to review and critique in a litigation ...
Journal of Business Valuation 2016 Edition
From the CBV Institute ...
The effect of shareholder lawsuits on cost of equity
A firm may see adjustments to its cost of equity capital either at the time a shareholder lawsuit is filed or when the outcome of the lawsuit is determined—or both—says a new paper by William J. Moser (Miami University).
2017’s Top Business Valuation and Damages Cases
BVLaw’s selection of the most educational cases of 2017.
Trial Court’s Stock Valuation Contravenes Agreement’s Buyout Provisions
In shareholder dispute over minority owner’s stock buyout, appeals court finds trial court’s sole reliance on five-year-old valuation and its rejection of appraiser’s recent valuation violates parties’ shareholder agreement and requires revaluation.