-7-
experts, namely, Hein, Janet M. Labenz (Labenz), and Z.
Christopher Mercer (Mercer), also prepared an expert report under
Rule 143(f). Hein’s expert report (Seim Johnson report) was
merely the appraisal with a February 8, 2003, cover letter
stating in relevant part that “Our opinion is the same opinion as
it was as of December 31, 1996". The cover letter also stated
that Seim Johnson had been
engaged with the management of the [Glenwood] Bank to
value the [estate’s 116 Glenwood Bank] shares as of
December 31, 1996. * * * We have inquired as to
significant items for the last quarter of 1996 that
would have a material effect on the valuation of the
stock from the time of Mrs. Noble’s death and the date
of our original valuation. We were informed that there
are no such items which would have materially affected
the valuation from the time of death to the valuation
date.
Labenz’s expert report (Labenz report) was accepted into evidence
as a rebuttal to the opinion of respondent’s expert. The Labenz
report addressed the differences between the Shenehon report and
the Seim Johnson report.
The Court with no objection from respondent recognized
Mercer as an expert on the valuation of financial institutions
and with no objection from respondent accepted Mercer’s expert
report (Mercer report) into evidence. The Mercer report
concluded that the fair market value of the estate’s 11.6-percent
interest in Glenwood Bank was $841,000. The Mercer report
generally arrived at this fair market value through a two-step
process. First, the Mercer report ascertained the marketable
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011