Results are measured by what the Judge decides

Experts on valuation are either engaged by a party to the lawsuit, or are appointed by the court. Regardless of how the expert entered the case, his opinion and the reasoning leading up to it should be presented in a clear and comprehensive fashion. It is the responsibility of the valuation expert to enlighten the court regarding the issues.

With competent experts advancing contradictory valuation conclusions, the Court evaluates the competing presentations, and makes its decision. Very often, the economic impact of this decision determines which party prevails in the case.          

The following cases involved Ed Donnelly as a presenting expert. Competing experts were well recognized for competence and a history of courtroom success.

Miller v Miller - Supreme Court, Suffolk County, NY (Index: 98-01465)
Klien-Lipton, a reputable valuation firm from Woodbury, New York represented Mrs. Miller, while the defendant engaged Ed Donelly. Each witness presented his opinion to the Court, and was subjected to cross-examination. Klien-Lipton valued the defendant telemarketing company at $979,000, at the commencement of the matrimonial action. Mr. Donnelly valued the same business at $175,000.

Upon hearing the testimony of each expert, the Court placed a value of $475,000, on the defendant's business.

Dennis K. Mullane v Kevin Mullane, Dorothy Mullane and B.A. Tofte Co, Inc. - Supreme Court, Suffolk County, NY (Index 99-26087)
This case represented a family business engaged in animal fat rendering. A dispute between family members regarding the liquidation of the business resulted in this shareholder oppression lawsuit.

Ed Donnelly was engaged by the majority interest shareholders to value the business. The well known firm of Martin Randese, The Rand Consulting Group, was enlisted to value the company for the minority interest.

The Randisi group estimated the value of the company at $2,000,000. Donnelly determined the value to be $133,066. In a revised report issued subsequent to the Donnelly valuation, the Rand Group revised its valuation downward to $250,000. The case was rapidly settled at slightly higher than the Donnelly appraisal value.

Colacci v Colacci - Supreme Court, Queens County, NY (Index 10489-99)
This case represents a matrimonial action in which the valuation issue concerned the enhanced income of the plaintiff, a Registered Nurse, who obtained her credentials during the course of the marriage.

Barry Pulchin, a well established matrimonial valuation expert, and senior partner of Pulchin, Goldstein & Company, LLP, represented the non-credentialed party. Mr. Pulchin submitted a valuation report in support of a $402,000 enhanced earnings value. The Donnelly value assigned to the enhanced earning capacity of Ms. Colacci was $150,406.

Upon instruction from the Court, the two experts collaborated upon an agreed upon value. That value was $172,000. Accordingly, the Court directed a stipulation to that effect.

Ackerman v Ackerman - Supreme Court, Nassau County, NY (Index 98-032622) 
In this matrimonial case, the fair market value of  the Neil Ackerman law firm was at issue. The Rand Consulting Group represented Mrs ackerman, while Ed Donnelly represented Neil Ackerman. The Rand value amounted to $572,000. Donnelly valued the firm at $113,000.

The case was decided by the Court at a value of $300,000 for the equitable distribution value of the law firm.