Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Discounts inappropriate in valuing minority interest in mandatory buyback, appeals court rules

When a minority shareholder in an Indiana company was terminated as a director and officer, a dispute arose over whether, under a buyback agreement, the use of discounts for lack of control and marketability was permissible in valuing his shares.

Hartman v. BigInch Fabricators & Construction Holding Co., Inc.

In dispute about valuation of terminated shareholder’s minority interest, appeals court finds the trial court erred when it allowed discounts for lack of control and marketability; under controlling case law, discounts are inappropriate where the buyback is mandatory and to the controlling party.

In Mandatory Buyback, Indiana Appeals Court Disallows Use of Discounts

In dispute about valuation of terminated shareholder’s minority interest, appeals court finds the trial court erred when it allowed discounts for lack of control and marketability; under controlling case law, discounts are inappropriate where the buyback is mandatory and to the controlling party.

Virginia court nixes challenge to appraisal done according to valuation agreement

In the category of buyout disputes notwithstanding a valuation agreement, a recent Virginia case stands out for showing the evidentiary hurdle a challenger must overcome to defeat a third-party appraisal done in accordance with a controlling agreement.

BVLaw case update: buyout disputes

Even when the members of a business entity plan ahead for a potential buyout, a lot can still go wrong, often because the language in a controlling shareholder agreement leaves too much room for interpretation or a necessary corporate document is missing.

In Share Redemption Case, Bylaws Militate Against Book-Value Valuation

In share redemption dispute pivoting on missing shareholder agreement, high court finds corporate bylaws show trial court’s use of book value to value separating member’s stock was error but plaintiff failed to show right to fair value determination as a matter of law; court remands.

Lynd v. Marshall County Pediatrics, P.C.

In share redemption dispute pivoting on missing shareholder agreement, high court finds corporate bylaws show trial court’s use of book value to value separating member’s stock was error but plaintiff failed to show right to fair value determination as a matter of law; court remands.

Confusion Over Key Valuation Issues Prompts Remand

In shareholder dispute, appeals court says trial court did not follow controlling shareholder agreement requiring appraiser to value the company as an entity; also, appraiser’s report left it unclear whether valuation included improper minority discount.

Confusion Over Key Valuation Issues Prompts Remand

In shareholder dispute, appeals court says trial court did not follow controlling shareholder agreement requiring appraiser to value the company as an entity; also, appraiser’s report left it unclear whether valuation included improper minority discount.

Swiderski Equip. v. Swiderski

In shareholder dispute, appeals court says trial court did not follow controlling shareholder agreement requiring appraiser to value the company as an entity; also, appraiser’s report left it unclear whether valuation included improper minority discount.

Spouse’s Unilateral Stock Agreement Sets Value in Divorce Action

Appeals court agrees with trial court that valuation in stock agreement is binding in partition action even though non-owner spouse refused to sign agreement and agreement did not mention divorce as one of the circumstances in which valuation applied.

Spouse’s Unilateral Stock Agreement Sets Value in Divorce Action

Appeals court agrees with trial court that valuation in stock agreement is binding in partition action even though non-owner spouse refused to sign agreement and agreement did not mention divorce as one of the circumstances in which valuation applied.

Baumboree v. Baumbouree

Appeals court agrees with trial court that valuation in stock agreement is binding in partition action even though non-owner spouse refused to sign agreement and agreement did not mention divorce as one of the circumstances in which valuation applied.

Shareholder Agreement Sparks Suit Over Discount Use in FMV Calculation

Appeals court affirms probate court’s ruling that ambiguous shareholder agreement requiring determination of fair market value of decedent’s minority interest in closely held companies accommodated use of discounts for lack of marketability and control.

Shareholder Agreement Sparks Suit Over Discount Use in FMV Calculation

Probate court says expert and other testimony aiding in interpretation of ambiguous shareholder agreement shows that fair market value determination of decedent’s minority interest allowed for use of discounts for lack of marketability and control.

Value Determination Accords With Parties’ Contract, Chancery Says

Court says valuation firm’s determination of value of defendants’ put units accords with agreement to which plaintiff and defendants committed themselves; since contract does not provide for judicial review, court won’t “second-guess” valuator’s judgment.

In re Estate of Bittner (Bittner II)

Appeals court affirms probate court’s ruling that ambiguous shareholder agreement requiring determination of fair market value of decedent’s minority interest in closely held companies accommodated use of discounts for lack of marketability and control.

PECO Logistics, LLC v. Walnut Inv. Partners, L.P.

Court says valuation firm’s determination of value of defendants’ put units accords with agreement to which plaintiff and defendants committed themselves; since contract does not provide for judicial review, court won’t “second-guess” valuator’s judgment.

In re Estate of Bittner (Bittner I)

Probate court says expert and other testimony aiding in interpretation of ambiguous shareholder agreement shows that fair market value determination of decedent’s minority interest allowed for use of discounts for lack of marketability and control.

Court Finds Facts Back Expert’s Value-Per-Subscriber Metric

Court finds trust failed to prove insolvency; its expert’s use of DCF alone was inappropriate where there were no cash flow projections untainted by fraud, but competing expert’s market-based approach and value per subscriber analysis were solid.

Adelphia Recovery Trust v. FPL Group, Inc. (In re Adelphia Corp.)

Court finds trust failed to prove insolvency; its expert’s use of DCF alone was inappropriate where there were no cash flow projections untainted by fraud, but competing expert’s market-based approach and value per subscriber analysis were solid.

21 results