Ag Law & Taxation Case Annotations

Minnwest Bank, M.V. v. Molenaar, No. A08-1875, 2009 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1120 (Minn. Ct. App. Oct. 6, 2009)(defendant, a private party, may not oppose confirmation of partition sale by enforcing provisions of state law which restrict a corporation's right to acquire and own agricultural land; only state attorney general may enforce such provision).

De Benveniste v. Christensen Family, LP, et al., No. 082387, 2009 Va. LEXIS 85 (Va. Sup. Ct. Sept. 18, 2009)(limited partner, as co-tenant, must share cost of subdivision preparations for partnership asset (350-acre showplace cattle farm) with other limited partners; expenses incurred with intent to maximize sale value of farm by dividing it into a 68-lot subdivision and rule of contribution among co-tenants applies and the securing of preliminary subdivision plan was a permanent improvement; plaintiff did not consistently oppose pursuit of subdivision plan and alleged procedural defects in application for subdivision plan does not provide plaintiff grounds for asserting that other limited partners acted with unclean hands).

Powell, et al. v. Comr., No. 08-9005 (10th Cir. Sept. 11, 2009)(question of whether decedent's transfer of assets from marital fund to family limited partnership constituted a completed transfer for gift tax purposes was directly at issue in the estate tax case and in the gift tax case; decedent did not complete transfer as claimed - because attempted transfer to FLP was not completed and did not constitute a gift, a gift tax liability attributable to the transfer did not arise, and no gift tax deduction allowed; estate tax deficiency upheld; decision affirms T.C. Memo. 2007-370).

Perry v. Perry Farms, Inc., No. 3:08 CV 921, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66482 (N.D. Ohio Jul. 31, 2009)(majority shareholders in closely-held corporation did not breach fiduciary duties to minority shareholders; majority's actions consistent with powers given to them in operating agreement and done with business purpose).

Stone, et al. v. United States, No. 07-17068 (9th Cir. Mar. 24, 2009)(estate entitled to 5 percent valuation fractional interest discount (amount conceded to by the government) when valuing 50 percent interest in nineteen-painting art collection).

Brent v. Field, et al., No. 07-08-0065-CV, 2008 Tex. App. LEXIS 9676 (Tex. Ct. App. Dec. 30, 2008)(contract construction case involving farming partnership business relations).

Wiggs v. Peedin, No. COA08-578, 2008 N.C. App. LEXIS 2243 (N.C. Ct. App. Dec. 16, 2008)(genuine issue of material fact existed regarding whether the parties established a partnership based upon either apparent authority of partnership by estoppel; trial court grant of summary judgment for defendant reversed).

Baltrusch v. Baltrusch, No. DA 07-0088, 2008 Mont. LEXIS 380 (Mont. Sup. Ct. Jul. 9, 2008)(Case involves legal issues arising from oral farm partnership between brothers).

Holmer, et al. v. Holmer, et al., No. 13-07-28, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 2746 (Ohio Ct. App. Jun. 30, 2008)(oral farm partnership formed between family members; family dispute occurs and partnership dissolved and accounting sought).

Hora v. Hora, No. CA2007-03-007, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 2433 (Ohio Ct. App. Jun. 16, 2008)(trial court judgment for parents against son (the farm tenant) upheld; son signed one-year lease for 2004 stating that the parties would not pursue any legal action against the parties or related family members for anything related to the farm, farm equipment, or the farm's operation; no partnership created; and son's claim that he signed lease under duress raised for first time on appeal).

Dodd v. Potomac Riverside Farm, Inc., et al., No. 33501, 2008 W. Va. LEXIS 45 (W.Va. Sup. Ct. App. Jun. 13, 2008)(dissenters' rights statute invoked upon sale of seven-generation, closely-held, family farming corporation located on Potomac River; trial court properly determined fair market value of dissenting shareholders' shares of stock; 6 percent simple interest to be applied).

Hornick v. Boyce, No. 07-1040, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 12208 (10th Cir. Jun. 6, 2008)(defendant breached option agreement which allowed plaintiff to purchase defendants’ 50 percent interest in Colorado LLC containing 5,000 acres as sole asset; plaintiff entitled to $1.5 million in damages based on plaintiff’s testimony of ranchland value).

Ohio Fresh Eggs, LLC v. Wise, No. 07AP-780, 2008 Ohio App. LEXIS 2065 (Ohio Ct. App. May 20, 2008)(plaintiff properly disclosed all required parties to defendant (Ohio Department of Agriculture) upon application for operational permits for chicken processing facility; undisclosed investor merely passive, and "Option to Purchase" agreement gave investor no more right to control plaintiff than commercial lender would possess and, thus, need not be disclosed under Ohio law; testimony of defendant's expert (Neil Harl) did not squarely address operative issue in case and plaintiff's expert testimony much more germane and persuasive than Harl's testimony; as such, defendant acted unreasonably (even under high deferential standard) in favoring Harl's testimony at administrative hearing).