VV
Showing 17–32 of 378 results
-
Opinion vs. legal conclusion: Has your expert crossed the line?
January / February 2023
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 451
Abstract: The line between permissible expert opinion and impermissible legal or factual conclusions can sometimes be blurry under the Federal Rules of Evidence. It’s critical for lawyers and their expert witnesses to understand the distinction between an opinion that embraces an ultimate issue and one that offers a legal conclusion. This article provides examples that help clarify the rules. In re Columbia Pipeline Group, Inc. Merger Litigation, Cons. C.A. No. 2018-0484-JTL (Del. Ch. July 14, 2022).
-
Financial experts play a key role in employment discrimination cases
January / February 2023
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 588
Abstract: Employment discrimination claims based on race, sex, age, religion and other characteristics continue to be a major concern for employers. This article highlights how financial experts can help the parties calculate and evaluate damages, as well as analyze the situation to prove or disprove discrimination.
-
Use a multifaceted approach to tackle postacquisition disputes
January / February 2023
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 625
Abstract: In M&A transactions, disputes sometimes arise over contractual purchase price adjustments, representations and warranties, earnout provisions, or alleged misrepresentations by the seller. This article explains how determining liability and calculating damages in these disputes involves a combination of business valuation, forensic accounting and economic analysis techniques.
-
Vectura Ltd. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC – Reasonable royalty damages reflect built-in apportionment
January / February 2023
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 855
Abstract: Valuation experts commonly use the reasonable royalty method to measure damages in patent infringement cases. When a royalty base is the “entire market value,” an expert may apportion it among the product’s infringing and noninfringing components. But when reasonable royalty damages are based on a sufficiently comparable license, apportionment is often unnecessary. This article summarizes a recent Federal Circuit decision in which the court ruled that apportionment was already built into the expert’s model. A sidebar explains how the relief from royalty method works. Vectura Ltd. v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC, 981 F.3d 1030 (Fed. Cir. 2020).
-
Sullivan v. Loden – Estate planning attorney sued for undervaluing family business
November / December 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 454
Abstract: A recent federal district court case illustrates what can happen when business valuations are prepared by attorneys rather than qualified valuation professionals. This article explains what happened when a disgruntled heir sued her deceased mother’s attorney for malpractice, alleging that previous gifts of stock had been undervalued. Sullivan v. Loden, No. 21-cv-123-DKW-RT, U.S. District Court, D. Hawaii, May 4, 2022.
-
Focus on fraud in M&A transactions
November / December 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 555
Abstract: Due diligence is a critical part of the merger and acquisition process — and one key area of concern is fraud risk. Financial statement manipulation can sometimes make the target appear more valuable than it really is. Likewise, weak fraud policies, internal controls and cybersecurity practices can be ticking time bombs for an unwary buyer. This article explains how a forensic accountant can help evaluate a target’s fraud risk and look for signs of earnings manipulation and other accounting irregularities.
-
Human capital: What’s it worth?
November / December 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 652
Abstract: In today’s tight labor market, human capital is critical to the success of a business. Although it’s not usually reported on the balance sheet, human capital can be a valuable asset. This article describes when human capital might need to be valued, different types of human-capital-related assets, and how these assets are valued based on reproduction and replacement costs.
-
Why policy language is critical in business interruption claims
November / December 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 817
Abstract: When a business seeks to recover damages under a business interruption policy, the language of the policy is critical. This article summarizes a case where the policyholder’s failure to understand key terms caused the court to side with the insurance company. A sidebar highlights ways that financial experts can help businesses file business interruption claims. TransWorld Food Service, LLC v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, No. 1:19-cv-03772-SDG, U.S. District Court, N.D. Ga., March 28, 2022.
-
Beware of 3 common valuation pitfalls
September / October 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 442
Abstract: The presence of an error, misstatement or erroneous deviation from customary business valuation practice in an expert’s report is a risky proposition. It could trigger (or worsen) an IRS inquiry or perhaps lead to an embarrassing courtroom mishap. This article identifies some common pitfalls that qualified valuation pros avoid — and to which less-than-qualified ones often fall prey.
-
ESOP valuations: How much is too much?
September / October 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 499
Abstract: The U.S. Department of Labor recently suffered a resounding defeat in Walsh v. Bowers. This article explains why a federal district court rejected the DOL’s claim that an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) overpaid for the sponsoring company’s stock. Walsh v. Bowers, No. 18-00155 SOM-WRP (D. Hawaii Sept. 17, 2021).
-
Divorce valuation hinges on expert credibility
September / October 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 581
Abstract: A recent Nebraska divorce case illustrates how differences in experts’ assumptions can have a dramatic impact on valuations. This article explains how five critical assumptions affected the experts’ conclusions regarding the value of the husband’s roofing business as of December 31, 2018. Cain v. Cain, No. A-21-068, Court of Appeals of Nebraska (February 1, 2022).
-
Kars 4 Kids Inc. v. America Can! Cars for Kids – Do you know the difference between lost profits and disgorgement?
September / October 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 980
Abstract: A recent trademark infringement case involving competing not-for-profit organizations addresses several interesting issues regarding plaintiffs’ remedies and the calculation of damages. This article summarizes this case and discusses the importance of supporting infringement claims with a comprehensive analysis of the case facts. A sidebar highlights the importance of factoring current market conditions into lost profits calculations and other financial analyses. Kars 4 Kids Inc. v. America Can! Cars for Kids, 8 F.4th 209 (3rd Cir. 2021). Kars 4 Kids Inc. v. America Can! Cars for Kids, Nos. 3:14-cv-7770 and 3:16-cv-4232 (D.N.J. May 9, 2019). Kars 4 Kids Inc. v. America Can! Cars for Kids, Nos. 3:14-cv-7770 and 3:16-cv-4232 (D.N.J. April 1, 2020).
-
IRS hot button: Deductible management fees vs. disguised distributions
July / August 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 446
Abstract: The U.S. Tax Court recently ruled that management fees a corporation paid to shareholders over a three-year period weren’t deductible; instead, they represented disguised distributions. This article summarizes the key points of this decision and explains why it could be relevant outside of a federal tax context. Aspro, Inc. v. Commissioner, TC Memo 2021-8.
-
Know the company’s value before meeting with lenders
July / August 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 594
Abstract: An understanding of a company’s value is critical when applying for new loans to grow the business or renegotiating existing terms to be more favorable. This article explains why a balance sheet can present an incomplete picture of financial position. Current market values are based on future earnings and the prices paid for comparable companies.
-
Delaware Chancery Court weighs in on fair value in statutory buyouts
July / August 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 643
Abstract: Reliable market indicators often provide the best evidence of a corporation’s fair value in statutory appraisal rights cases. This article summarizes a recent Delaware Chancery Court case that based the buyout price for a dissenting shareholder’s interest on two market-based value indicators. The court also factored in changes in value between the merger’s signing and closing dates. In Re Appraisal of Regal Entertainment Group, Cons. C.A. No. 2018-0266-JTL, Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (May 13, 2021). BCIM Strategic Value Master Fund LP v. HFF, Inc., C.A. No. 2019-0558-JTL, Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (February 2, 2022).
-
Harvey v. Harvey – Buy-sell provision applies to divorce valuation
July / August 2022
Newsletter: Viewpoint on Value
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 844
Abstract: The Fifth District Court of Appeals of California recently addressed the valuation of a closely held business in connection with a divorce. Notably, the court valued the wife’s 50% interest pursuant to the valuation provisions of a buy-sell agreement rather than the state’s family code. This article explains why the appellate court rejected a discount for taxes that weren’t “immediate and specific,” but allowed a discount for lack of marketability. Harvey v. Harvey, No. F078166, Court of Appeals of California, Fifth District (December 16, 2021).