This is another in a rash of cases where one side either did not engage a valuation expert or did not use the expert to the best advantage. In a Minnesota divorce case, the husband, who owned interests in two real estate businesses, engaged an expert but not to perform formal business valuations. The expert’s comments were of a general nature and not specific to the subject businesses. The wife’s expert did do formal valuations, and the court based its opinion on that expert’s valuations.

The husband appealed, but the appellate court affirmed the lower court’s opinion. Plus, the husband argued to the appellate court that the report of the wife’s expert conflicted with Minnesota law in that it did not consider (personal) goodwill and the husband’s value to the company. But this argument came too late—the husband had not raised it with the lower court, so the appellate court could not address it.

There are other issues in this complex case, including taxes. The case is Pemberton v. Pemberton, 2023 Minn. App. Unpub. LEXIS 485; 2023 WL 4066631, and a case analysis and full court opinion will soon be on the BVLaw platform.

Extra: Tune in today for the BVLaw Case Update webinar at 10:00 a.m.-11:40 a.m. PT (1:00 p.m.-2:40 p.m. ET). Two veteran valuators and a family law attorney/valuation expert examine recent valuation and financial litigation decisions.