Pueblo Bancorporation v. Lindoe, Inc.
Supreme Court of Colorado
1DissentJustice Kourlis
In my view, defining “fair value” so to extinguish the possibility of marketability discounts in dissenters’ rights actions represents a policy decision that the General Assembly must make. Our statute is, as the majority notes, ambiguous. Colorado courts, with the exception of the court of appeals’ decision in this case, have never interpreted the language of the statute as precluding trial courts from considering a marketability discount in valuing dissenters’ shares. We must presume that the General Assembly is aware of those cases.
Despite the national trend to eliminate the marketability…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cavalier Oil Corp. v. HarnettSupreme Court of Delaware · 1989
- Vaughan v. McMinnSupreme Court of Colorado · 1997
- Copper Mountain, Inc. v. Poma of America, Inc.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1995
- Walter S. Cheesman Realty Co. v. MooreColorado Court of Appeals · 1988
- Breniman v. Agricultural Consultants, Inc.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1992
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.