- 24 -
for $907,594, consisting of: (a) $10,000 that decedent paid for
the stock, and (b) $897,594, decedent’s pro rata share of CSB’s
earned but unpaid profits.
Spiro also applied a 15-percent control premium. He
concluded that the value of decedent’s CSB stock was $1,043,733.
Under the 1973 agreement, not more than 19 percent of CSB’s
payment to decedent’s estate would have been for decedent’s CSB
stock, and at least 81 percent would have been for his work in
process. If we apply those percentages to the $5 million
payment, not more than $950,000 of the $5 million insurance
proceeds was paid for decedent’s CSB stock, and at least
$4,050,000 was paid for his work in process. This analysis
justifies respondent's position that only $1,105,762 was paid to
redeem decedent's stock.
Petitioner argues that part of Spiro’s report was
inadmissible because it included his legal opinion about the
meaning of the 1973 agreement and the 1988 amendment. Petitioner
is sounding a false alarm. We do not consider Spiro’s legal
opinions in deciding this case. Aguilar v. International
Longshoremen’s Union Local #10, 966 F.2d 443, 447 (9th Cir.
1992); Marx v. Diners' Club, Inc., 550 F.2d 505, 509 (2d Cir.
1977). However, it is appropriate that Spiro disclose the
assumptions he made about the rights of CSB and decedent under
the 1973 agreement and the 1988 amendment. Knowing his
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011