Search for: "Associates Discount Corporation v. Held"
Results 1 - 20
of 190
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
24 Dec 2012, 2:00 am
Vitale, a trial court decision last year involving the buy-out of a minority shareholder in two closely held C corporations (read here my post on Giaimo); and Chiu v. [read post]
23 May 2016, 3:22 am
The Appellate Decision The primary issue addressed in last week’s appellate decision, authored by Associate Justice Thomas A. [read post]
22 Jun 2009, 4:00 am
Amodio, 70 NY2d 5 (1987), the court must apply DLOM in valuing the shares of a closely held corporation. [read post]
17 Sep 2012, 2:00 am
Weiss in Chiu v. [read post]
8 Oct 2009, 5:01 am
See Jones v. [read post]
26 May 2015, 10:09 am
., Ltd. v. [read post]
5 Jan 2015, 3:29 am
Indeed, the Court of Appeals recognizes that “[v]aluing a closely held corporation is not an exact science” because such corporations “by their nature contradict the concept of a market’ value. [read post]
2 May 2011, 4:00 am
Referee Crespo also bases his rejection of DLOM on case law, including Vick v. [read post]
18 Mar 2011, 11:58 am
See, e.g., Hale v. [read post]
15 Aug 2011, 3:00 am
JHO Lehner rejects any consideration of minority discount, quoting from Friedman v. [read post]
13 Oct 2014, 3:27 am
The panel will discuss the extent to which family ownership affects disputes in LLCs and other unincorporated entities; whether family businesses are distinctive in ways that are legally relevant; and whether, as a practical matter, the statutory differences between LLCs, corporations, and other forms of business association matter. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 3:35 am
In its 1993 ruling in Nixon v Blackwell, the Delaware Supreme Court broadly rejected the notion that “there should be any special, judicially-created rules to ‘protect’ minority stockholders of closely-held Delaware corporations” (626 A.2d 1366, 1379). [read post]
11 Oct 2017, 12:00 am
In Olagues v. [read post]
27 Oct 2014, 9:59 am
Programming Found. v. [read post]
11 Feb 2016, 7:34 am
RUEDA, Appellant V. [read post]
24 Aug 2010, 2:18 am
The omission of a single letter from the mark such as an “s” in Tire Discounters, Inc. v. [read post]
26 Aug 2021, 1:10 pm
McDonald Holding: The Court of Appeals held that a publicly-held Maryland corporation’s charter contained an ambiguous provision regarding a series of preferred stock. [read post]
23 Feb 2015, 3:19 am
There are increased costs and risks associated with corporate ownership of the real estate in this case that would not be present if the real estate was owned outright. [read post]
3 Jan 2011, 3:00 am
Beckerman, 126 AD2d 591 (2d Dept 1987), and Muller v. [read post]
3 Sep 2015, 4:02 pm
In a 61 page judgment in CPA Australia v NZICA [2015] NZHC 1854 Dobson J held that, whilst NZICA representatives had made some indefensible disparaging remarks, CPAA’s inability to establish pecuniary loss meant its claims could not be made out. [read post]
