You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Cannon v. Bertrand

Citations: 981 So. 2d 169; 7 La.App. 3 Cir. 1278; 2008 La. App. LEXIS 565; 2008 WL 1734158Docket: No. CA 07-1278

Court: Louisiana Court of Appeal; April 16, 2008; Louisiana; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, a withdrawing partner contested the valuation of his one-third share in a partnership focused on agricultural activities, after the trial court applied a 35% minority discount. The partnership, established by three individuals, required each partner to share profits and losses equally, but disagreements arose following one partner's withdrawal. The trial court determined the partnership's total assets to be $1,054,368 and valued the withdrawing partner's share at $351,456 before applying the discount, resulting in a valuation of $228,447. The withdrawing partner appealed, arguing against the minority discount, claiming errors under Louisiana Civil Code Articles 2823-24. However, the appellate court upheld the trial court's discretion to apply the discount, referencing the Shopf v. Marina Del Ray Partnership case, which allows for such discretion based on fair market value considerations. The court found that a minority interest in a closely held business may have less market value due to illiquidity and marketing challenges. The decision was affirmed, emphasizing that the trial court did not abuse its discretion, and the withdrawing partner was held responsible for all appeal costs.

Legal Issues Addressed

Application of Minority Discount

Application: The court applied a 35% minority discount to the withdrawing partner's share, justified by the discretion permitted under case law and the specific circumstances of the partnership.

Reasoning: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in applying a 35% discount to Cannon’s minority interest in the partnership. Evidence indicated that the value of a one-third interest varies between the two remaining partners and an outside investor.

Discretion in Valuation Under Louisiana Law

Application: The appellate court affirmed the trial court's discretion under Louisiana law to apply a minority discount, referencing the Shopf case as guiding precedent.

Reasoning: Cannon contends that these issues should be reviewed de novo; however, the court disagrees, holding that under Shopf v. Marina Del Ray Partnership, the use of a minority discount is at the court's discretion.

Fair Market Value in Partner Withdrawal

Application: The valuation of a partner's share upon withdrawal should reflect fair market value, defined as the price a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller.

Reasoning: According to Louisiana Civil Code articles, a former partner is entitled to the value of their share at the time of withdrawal, which must be paid in cash with interest if the partnership continues.

Valuation of Withdrawing Partner's Share

Application: The trial court determined the valuation of the withdrawing partner's share by assessing the total partnership assets and applying a minority discount.

Reasoning: The trial court assessed the total assets of the partnership at $1,054,368, determining that his one-third share amounted to $351,456. However, the court applied a 35% minority discount, resulting in a final valuation of $228,447 for Cannon’s share.