Under traditional principles of business valuation, courts are generally expected to eschew metrics post-dating the valuation date. But often, litigants hoping to either increase or decrease an entity’s valuation ask courts to consider post-valuation date events or financial performance as affirmatory or disaffirmatory of financial projections or assumptions made before or as of the valuation date. Sometimes, litigants succeed in that endeavor. Read about a recent example in this week’s New York Business Divorce.
Continue Reading Can Post-Valuation Date Historical Performance Trump Pre-Valuation Date Financial Projections?

While there is tremendous diversity from state to state when it comes to statutory and judge-made law in business divorce cases, business valuation principles are—with a few notable exceptions—far more homogenous.  So it makes sense to occasionally venture beyond New York’s borders to see how other courts and experts are addressing the business valuation questions that New York-based business divorces often encounter.

This week’s post looks at several recent decisions across the country concerning valuation principles and discounts.  While each case features different applicable rules and agreements, our New York readers would be wise to note the persuasive power of these cases, especially given the sometimes-thin body of New York caselaw on business valuation issues.Continue Reading Cross-Country Valuation Check-Up: Discounts, Buy-Sell Agreements, and Ambiguity Potholes

This week’s New York Business Divorce post features a decision after valuation trial nine-years in the making, determining the fair value of a 50% interest in two family-owned real estate holding companies
Continue Reading Fair Value Decision Caps Decade-Long Dispute Over Family-Owned Real Estate Holding Companies

When a shareholder petitions for dissolution, many states have statutes allowing the corporation to respond by buying out the complaining shareholder. This week’s post takes a look at several recent decisions concerning buyout elections across the country.
Continue Reading A Cross-Country Road Trip of Elections to Purchase in Dissolution Proceedings

In an unusual case, a divided California appellate panel recently grappled with the application of minority and marketability discounts in a statutory appraisal proceeding triggered by a buyout election in a proceeding brought for judicial dissolution of an LLC, where the governing statute utilizes the fair market value standard instead of the more typical fair value standard. Learn more in this week’s New York Business Divorce.
Continue Reading Statutory Buyouts and Discounts Under the Fair Market Value Standard: An Awkward Pair?

When valuing an owner’s interest in a closely-held company, the calculation and applicability of a discount for lack of marketability is among the most fertile grounds for sharp disagreement. One open question: should the DLOM account for any contractual restrictions on a controlling owner’s ability to transfer his or her control?
Continue Reading Fueling the DLOM Debate: Control Transfer Restrictions and the Discount for Lack of Marketability

Was the company worth $30 million or $6 million? That was the question recently decided by Justice Vito M. DeStefano who presided over a 7-day fair-value appraisal hearing in Magarik v. Kraus USA, Inc. This week’s New York Business Divorce has the story.
Continue Reading $30 Million Appraisal of Plumbing Fixtures “Marketeer” Goes Down the Drain at Fair Value Hearing

George Costanza would be unhappy to hear about an Appellate Division decision last week affirming a trial court ruling, among others of interest in an LLC appraisal proceeding, in which it rejected as “double dipping” a request for post-valuation date income distributions on top of the fair value award. Learn more in this week’s New York Business Divorce.
Continue Reading No Double Dipping! Court Denies Post-Valuation Date Distributions in Equitable Buyout of LLC Member