Court Opinion

ID: 9752152
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 17:39:28.478097+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:27:08.488838
License: Public Domain

POMEROY, Justice
(concurring).
The appellant, Spang Stores, Inc., contends that the Commonwealth Court erred in applying the three-part statutory test for valuation of appellant’s capital stock, Act of June 1, 1889, P.L. 420, § 20, as amended, 72 P.S. § 1902, because the court focused exclusively on net earnings factor.
The Commonwealth Court did state in its opinion that “the element of prime importance here is the price or value indicated or measured by net earnings on the amount of profit made” (emphasis in original) and then concluded that appellant’s capital stock was worth $2,000,000. Capitalization, even at a rate of ten per cent, of appellant’s average net earnings figure1 for the applicable period, yields not $2,000,000 but only approximately $600,000. Nevertheless, I am satisfied from my review of the record that the quoted sentence is not to be *71taken in the literal sense argued for by appellant, and that the Commonwealth Court did in fact consider and give due weight to all the relevant statutory factors and that the valuation of appellant’s capital stock at which it arrived is sound and valid. Hence I agree that the order of the Commonwealth Court should be affirmed.
EAGEN, J., joins in this concurring opinion.

. $59,653 for the five year period.