- 48 -
reports, the estate's stock valuation experts "seemed to turn
their backs on standard methodology of valuing a real estate
holding company (which calls for important weight to be given to
net asset value)".
Contrary to Mr. Moore's assertion, Marrero Land is not
merely a real estate holding company. It is an operating company
that acquires, develops, manages, improves, maintains, leases,
and sells real estate. We have examined the respective reports
and the testimony of the estate's stock valuation experts and
find that they properly took all those facts into account in
their respective valuation analyses of decedent's interest in
Marrero Land on the valuation date. We have examined Mr. Moore's
reports and his testimony at trial. Based on that examination,
we believe that Mr. Moore improperly accorded disproportionate
weight to the Company's net asset value (determined by relying
on, inter alia, Mr. Guice's opinion as to the value of the
remaining unimproved real properties) in determining the fair
market value of decedent's interest in Marrero Land on the
valuation date. On the record before us, we are not persuaded
14(...continued)
properties. Respondent offered Mr. Moore, and we found him to be
qualified, as a stock valuation expert, not a real estate val-
uation expert. At trial, respondent stipulated that the portions
of Mr. Moore's rebuttal report addressing real estate valuation
matters should be deemed stricken from the record in this case,
and the Court so ordered.
Page: Previous 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011