A calculation of value is not the “gold standard,” but it is not unacceptable, an Arizona appellate court ruled in a divorce case.

No challenge: The husband and wife were owners of a law firm and the wife’s valuation expert used information she provided as well as an analysis of comparable businesses. The husband refused to provide any financial information to the expert in a timely manner. During the trial, the husband’s attorney did not challenge the methodologies and conclusion of the valuation expert. What’s more, the husband did not offer an opposing valuation. The trial court accepted the wife’s expert’s valuation, and the husband appealed, arguing that the expert’s opinion was deficient because it was a calculation of value report rather than “an opinion of value report.”

The appellate court noted that the fact-finder need not discount an expert’s opinion just because he did not consider every process and procedure that would be included had he conducted a more complete valuation. Plus, the husband’s counsel had ample opportunity to challenge the valuation and offer a competing opinion, but he did not.

The case is Mikalacki v. Rubezic, 2022 Ariz. App. Unpub. LEXIS 836; 2022 WL 10219850, and the full court opinion and a case analysis are available on the BVLaw platform.