Jafar v. Mohammed
In partnership dispute, appeals court affirms redemption award based on multiple-of-earnings valuation, finding valuation was reliable and admissible under state equivalent of Daubert and trial court had discretion to disregard other indicators of value.
Subsequent Transaction Too Remote to Allow for Reliable Valuation
In gift tax dispute involving decades-old transaction by a media magnate, Tax Court upholds IRS’s deficiency ruling and credits agency expert’s valuation of transferred stock based on a similar arm’s-length transaction occurring near the valuation date.
Comparable Transaction Exposes Error in Court’s Enterprise Goodwill Ruling
Appeals court strikes divorce ruling adopting income-based valuation of enterprise value of owner’s financial services business, valuation conflicts with data from similar transaction that occurred close to valuation date and involved owner-spouse.
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.
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.
South Carolina Supreme Court Makes New Law on Business Goodwill
In a first, state high court “cautiously” decides enterprise goodwill is marital property subject to equitable division and affirms that personal goodwill is not; court rejects claim that only professionals can develop personal goodwill in a business.
Redstone v. Commissioner
In gift tax dispute involving decades-old transaction by a media magnate, Tax Court upholds IRS’s deficiency ruling and credits agency expert’s valuation of transferred stock based on a similar arm’s-length transaction occurring near the valuation date.
In re Marriage of Johnson
Appeals court strikes divorce ruling adopting income-based valuation of enterprise value of owner’s financial services business, valuation conflicts with data from similar transaction that occurred close to valuation date and involved owner-spouse.
Moore v. Moore
In a first, state high court “cautiously” decides enterprise goodwill is marital property subject to equitable division and affirms that personal goodwill is not; court rejects claim that only professionals can develop personal goodwill in a business.
Court Affirms Rightness of Expert’s ‘Marital Value’ Calculation
Court upholds expert’s idiosyncratic valuation approach based on ascertaining “marital value” of community’s grocery stores as opposed to stores’ “investment value”; since the stores were not sold, valuation properly captured their value to owner spouse.
Court Backs Away From Support for Double-Dip Theory
In a divorce case involving dental practice, appeals court says using income stream “as a tool” to value a professional business and then using it “as actual income for a spousal support calculation” does not per se amount to impermissible double dipping.
In re Honer
Court upholds expert’s idiosyncratic valuation approach based on ascertaining “marital value” of community’s grocery stores as opposed to stores’ “investment value”; since the stores were not sold, valuation properly captured their value to owner spouse.
Corning v. Corning
The appellant in this case, the wife, appealed the trial court order for equitable distribution and alimony. The crux of the issues revolved around the values and date of value of two businesses owned by the parties and awarded to the husband in the distribution order. The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s orders.
North Carolina Appellate Court Affirms Trial Court Appeal of Valuation of Businesses Divorce
The appellant in this case, the wife, appealed the trial court order for equitable distribution and alimony. The crux of the issues revolved around the values and date of value of two businesses owned by the parties and awarded to the husband in the distribution order. The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s orders.
Bohme v. Bohme
In a divorce case involving dental practice, appeals court says using income stream “as a tool” to value a professional business and then using it “as actual income for a spousal support calculation” does not per se amount to impermissible double dipping.
Sparks v. Sparks
Appellate court upholds dated valuation husband’s expert performed of veterinary hospital two years prior to trial, where it informed proposed sale of minority interest in business to willing buyer and asset was not volatile; there is no “artificial cut-o ...
Charles v. Charles
California appellate court affirms trial court’s rejection of husband’s motion to value the community business at separation rather than at trial; the latter is the presumed valuation date under state law and the husband’s request was not “good cause,” bu ...
Colclasure v. Colclasure
State Supreme Court finds trial court erred in valuing husband’s business interest based on buy-out agreement the parties ignored; on remand, valuation must meet statutory requirement of a fair and just division.
Spady v. Spady
Appellate court holds that valuation date must bear a “rational relationship” to the assets being valued, and confirms no value for the auto dealership in this case, based on standard appraisal practice to round negative values to zero.
Wood v. Wood
Appellate court rejects calculation of value of closely held business under buy-sell agreement that did use proper valuation date or standard of value (FMV).
Goodwin v. Goodwin
Divorce experts diverged by more than $1 million in valuing steel business, and court adopts the larger value based on thorough expert evidence and compliance with the correct valuation date under applicable law.
Valuation Date for Rejection Damages in Bankruptcy
American HomePatient Inc. (AHP) entered into a credit agreement with certain of its secured lenders that included a warrant agreement that called for AHP to issue two series of warrants, which, when exercised, would permit the warrant holders to purchase 3,265,315 shares (or 19.99%) of AHP common stock at an exercise price of $0.01 per share.
Adoption of stale valuation date is abuse of discretion
One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the appropriate valuation date for valuing the couples’ business, Golight Inc., which had won a patent infringement suit against Walmart Stores Inc.
Separation date is proper valuation date
In this marital dissolution, the issue was whether the trial court abused its discretion in selecting the parties’ separation date as the valuation date.
Sufficient evidence must support valuation date
In this marital dissolution case, the issue was the appropriate valuation date for the parties’ 85 operating entities, which, in turn, owned more than 100 residential rental real estate properties.