Court Opinion

ID: 9532857
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:25:35.185224+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:51.410507
License: Public Domain

Judge NEY,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in part and dissent in part.
I concur fully in Parts II, IV, V, and VI of the majority opinion, but dissent as to Parts I and III.
I concur with the majority’s rejection of WCM’s assertion that, as a matter of law, a marketability discount must be applied here. Although I agree with the majority that a marketability discount may, in appropriate circumstances, be applied to determine the fair value of dissenters’ shares, I would conclude that the determination whether to apply such a discount is a factual one, and therefore, such a determination will not be disturbed on appeal if supported by the record.
Because I would conclude that the appraiser’s recommendation here not to apply a marketability discount was based upon facts amply supported by the evidence, I would not remand for further findings, but rather, would affirm the judgment as to all issues discussed in Part I of the majority opinion.
With respect to Part III, I disagree with the majority that remand for reconsideration of the issues contained therein is necessary. I would affirm the trial court’s resolution of those issues.
I am in accord with the majority’s opinion, set forth in Part VI, that a remand for recalculation of post-judgment interest is required. I would otherwise affirm the judgment of the trial court.