Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Showing 369–384 of 385 results
-
Security measures – Calculating damages in securities fraud cases
September / October 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 938
Abstract: When it comes to calculating damages, few types of litigation are more challenging than securities fraud. On any given day, a security’s price may be influenced by many factors, from the economy as a whole to industry trends to company-specific events. A damages expert must consider the legitimate market factors and isolate the impact of fraud or other wrongdoing. This article discusses the laws that govern securities fraud matters and looks at the expert’s role in determining the value of a security but for the misstatement or omission of a material fact, providing a brief example to illustrate the process. (Updated 8/29/12)
-
Cruise line faces rough seas in court
July / August 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 542
Abstract: This brief article looks at a series of court decisions involving Celebrity Cruises Inc. that provide insight into the “yardstick method” of computing lost profits. The case also illustrates the importance of presenting direct evidence to support a damages claim.
-
Show me the money! – Net worth analysis can reveal hidden assets
July / August 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 522
Abstract: Uncovering hidden assets can be important in a variety of litigation contexts, including fraud investigations, shareholder disputes, divorce and business valuations. One of the most effective techniques for demonstrating the existence of such assets is net worth analysis. This article looks at how net worth analysis works and explains the three primary methods experts typically use to detect hidden assets, including the asset method, the expenditures method and the bank deposits method. (Updated 8/29/12)
-
Music promoter wins “record” damage award
July / August 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 1054
Abstract: This article discusses a recent case, Popovich v. Sony Music Entertainment, which illustrates the benefits and pitfalls of using a hypothetical market standard to determine damages. As the case demonstrates, a party that loses an asset through the fault of another shouldn’t be deprived of damages simply because no ready market for that asset exists. The article notes that attorneys should work with their financial experts to develop alternative theories, including a hypothetical market standard, for quantifying a party’s financial loss.
-
Valuing manufacturing companies – How experts appraise these asset-intensive businesses
July / August 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 995
Abstract: When valuing manufacturers, appraisers consider these companies’ specific characteristics to reach a reliable estimate of value. Most valuators use one or some combination of the income, market or cost approaches. But regardless of which method or methods they use, valuators need to take into account the hard — and intangible — assets, the efficiency and skill of the workforce, and industry trends and risks. (Updated 5/21/12)
-
How do taxes “affect” S corporation valuations?
May / June 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 449
Abstract: For many years, “tax-affecting” the earnings of S corporations and other pass-through entities was a widely accepted valuation practice. But that changed in 1999, when the Tax Court ruled in Gross v. Commissioner that tax-affecting was inappropriate when valuing a minority interest in an S corporation. However, this brief article discusses recent cases which show that, though courts won’t accept full tax-affecting to reflect remote risks, tax-affecting can still be appropriate in the right circumstances.
-
Something to prove – Courts increase burden on experts
May / June 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 787
Abstract: This article summarizes three recent cases that highlight the critical role that burden of proof can play in cases involving expert financial testimony. The cases illustrate how important it is for litigants to engage qualified experts and to avoid taking shortcuts when performing damages or valuation analysis. A qualified expert can meet burden-of-proof standards by performing a thorough analysis that will stand up in court. Citations: J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. v. Commissioner, 458 F.3d. 564 (7th Cir. 2006). Morgan Stanley v. Coleman, 955 So. 2d. 1124 (Fla. App. 2007). Estate of Thompson, 499 F.3d. 129 (2d Cir. 2007).
-
Fraud’s a factor in solvency analysis
May / June 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 899
Abstract: In bankruptcy cases, a lot hinges on whether the debtor was insolvent when certain transactions took place. For example, some payments and transfers the debtor made within a specified time before filing for bankruptcy may be recovered as fraudulent transfers if the debtor was insolvent at the time of the transaction. This article discusses a recent case that addresses issues regarding fraud’s impact on insolvency. Citation: Edgewater Medical Center v. Edgewater Property Company, 373 B.R. 845 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. 2007).
-
A financial expert’s role in alter-ego cases
May / June 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 1147
Abstract: Operating as a corporation encourages investment by insulating shareholders’ personal assets against liability for corporate debts. But protection isn’t absolute. A plaintiff unable to collect a judgment from a corporation may ask a court to invoke its powers to “pierce the corporate veil” and hold owners responsible. This article explains how valuation experts can provide insight into whether particular corporate practices, such as shared services or related-party transactions, are appropriate or indicate an improper “alter-ego” relationship.
-
Taking a WACC at the cost of capital
March / April 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 454
Abstract: The “cost of capital” can be an important component of an income-based valuation. And like many valuation terms, its precise meaning depends on the context. This brief article explains how appraisers use the weighted average cost of capital to derive a discount rate. It also discusses how appraisers determine a company’s appropriate capital structure — or relative percentages of debt and equity.
-
Precise estimate needed for human capital value
March / April 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 764
Abstract: Most business owners can attest to the substantial time and expense involved in attracting and retaining quality talent. Yet from a valuation perspective, owners and their attorneys often need a more precise estimate of the value of a company’s human capital. This article discusses the variety of methods and approaches appraisers may use to come up with a well-founded, reliable workforce value. (Updated 5/21/12)
-
Rules of engagement – How CPA ethics rules affect your experts
March / April 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 815
Abstract: Rule 101 of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Code of Professional Conduct requires CPAs to be “independent in the performance of professional services.” AICPA Interpretation 101-3, Performance of Nonattest Services, describes several nonattest services that, if performed for an attest client, impair a CPA’s independence. A recent controversial revision to Interpretation 101-3 added expert witness services to the list of activities that impair a CPA’s independence. This article notes the importance of expert witness independence and the impact on litigation.
-
I’ve got a secret! Calculating damages in trade secret cases
March / April 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 1117
Abstract: Although trade secrets are classified as “intellectual property,” they’re conceptually and legally different from other types of intangible assets. Not for public consumption, they include a broad range of assets such as customer lists, formulas, designs, manufacturing processes and marketing plans. This article explains how experts calculate damages in trade secret cases and looks at some of the unique challenges inherent in evaluating this type of intellectual property.
-
The digital detective: Using statistics to uncover fraud
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 335
Abstract: This article explains how Benford’s Law can help uncover financial fraud by examining patterns in tabulated data. It’s almost impossible for someone to manipulate digits so that they appear to conform to Benford’s Law, so analysts use the technique to find suspicious numbers that merit further investigation. (Updated 5/7/12)
-
Growing pains – Patent case expands definition of “reasonable royalty”
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 941
Abstract: In the recent case Monsanto Co. v. McFarling, a Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision has significant implications for patent infringement damage calculations. This article describes the case’s background and explains the court’s reasoning in the case, which provides plaintiffs with additional ammunition for building a reasonable royalty claim. The decision also requires plaintiffs on both sides of patent infringement cases to look beyond “established” royalty rates at other economic factors that affect the amount to which the parties would agree in a hypothetical negotiation. Citation: Monsanto Co. v. McFarling, 488 F.3d 973 (Fed. Cir. 2007).
-
Are you up-to-date on the AICPA’s new valuation standards?
January / February 2008
Newsletter: Valuation & Litigation Briefing / Litigation & Valuation Report
Price: $225.00, Subscriber Price: $157.50
Word count: 807
Abstract: Last summer, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) finalized Statement on Standards for Valuation Services (SSVS) No. 1, which applies to CPAs who perform business valuations in engagements accepted on or after Jan. 1, 2008. This article explains the types of engagements SSVS No. 1 covers and the extent of information a valuation analysis performed by a CPA should contain. The article notes that it’s useful for attorneys and others to become familiar with these and other professional organizations’ valuation standards to ensure their experts’ methods and conclusions meet all relevant requirements.