Connecticut Appellate Court Remands Because of Impermissible Double Dipping

BVLaw
Court Case Digests
May 21, 2019

Access the Full Article

This article is available with a subscription to any of these products:
Already a subscriber?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (1,166 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
7379 Computer Related Services, NEC
541512 Computer Systems Design Services
marital dissolution/divorce
expert testimony, asset value, fair market value (FMV), spousal support, equitable distribution, sole proprietorship, future income, double counting, marital property, dissolution
Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (I)
190 Conn. App. 169; 209 A.3d 1282 (2019)
US
State Court
Connecticut
Appellate Court
James R. Guberman (wife); Mark S. Gottlieb (husband)
Alvord

Summary

Appellate court remands because of trial court’s impermissible double dipping, where trial court awarded wife half of the fair market value of husband’s two solely owned businesses, which represented husband’s sole income stream, and based spousal support on annual income generated by businesses.

See Also

Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (I)

Full Text of Court Cases
May 21, 2019

Appellate court remands because of trial court’s impermissible double dipping, where trial court awarded wife half of the fair market value of husband’s two solely owned businesses, which represented husband’s sole income stream, and based spousal support on annual income generated by businesses.