Estate of Pearl I. Amlie, Deceased, Rodney B. Amlie, Executor - Page 43

                                       - 43 -                                         
          adverse to Rod's with respect to the price terms for the stock.             
          As discussed above, an understated price in the 1995 FSA would              
          have penalized the other prospective heirs.                                 
               Obviously, the fact that the district court concluded in               
          1995 that the $118 price was inadequate, and the fact that Rod              
          was able to secure a price of $217.50 per share from FABG in                
          1997, raise questions concerning whether the $118 price in the              
          1995 FSA was comparable to similar arrangements entered at arm's            
          length.  However, on the facts of this case, we are persuaded               
          that the 1995 FSA price terms were arm's length.  The prospective           
          heirs other than Rod agreed to the $118 price even though they              
          were aware of the district court proceedings where it was found             
          inadequate.  In our view, the other prospective heirs and Rod               
          simply disagreed regarding the potential risks and rewards of               
          further negotiation or litigation with FABG over the value of the           
          Hill Rights.29  In the circumstances, the other prospective heirs           
          struck a bargain for the proverbial "bird in the hand" of a                 
          guaranteed price, transferring to Rod the benefits and burdens of           
          the pursuit of the possible "two in the bush".  It may have been            
          a bad bargain in hindsight, but we are persuaded it was arm's               
          length when made.                                                           
               A second factor also bears on our conclusion.  The nub of              
          the differing judgments on the value of the Hill Rights concerned           

               29  See supra note 26.                                                 





Page:  Previous  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  41  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  49  50  51  52  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011