For many years, we and other commentators have observed the problem with allowing judges wide discretion to fashion appraisal awards to dissenting shareholders based on widely divergent, expert valuation evidence submitted by the litigating parties. The results of this discretionary approach to valuation have been to make appraisal litigation less predictable and therefore more costly and likely. While this has been beneficial to professionals who profit from corporate valuation litigation, it has been harmful to shareholders, making deals costlier and less likely to be completed.
Learn more about this topic by William J. Carney and Keith Sharfman as seen in the Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law.
Read the complete article here.
Disclaimer: The views, opinions or examples included in linked article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect an official policy or position of ASA or its members.