The plaintiff appeals on the grounds that a valuation of the partnership’s business and its gold inventory utilized fair market value, when it should have used the book value of such inventory. The court determined that this claim is without merit as the book value of the gold as advanced by the plaintiff is based on historical costs which do not accurately reflect the increased market value of gold. However, the Supreme Court erred in adjusting the book value of the machinery and equipment by an additional $700,000 when plaintiff’s expert did in fact have a detailed and documented analysis that shows that the maximum value of the equipment totaled approximately $300,000 and thereby lowering the value of the business.

LINK TO DECISION