Goodwin v. Goodwin

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
February 25, 2010

Access the Full Article

This article and its downloads are available with a subscription to any of these products:
It is also available in these products:
Already a subscriber or product owner?  Login
This article is also available for purchase. (6,523 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
3312 Steel Works, Blast Furnaces (Including Coke Ovens), and Rolling Mills
331110 Iron and Steel Mills and Ferroalloy Manufacturing
marital dissolution/divorce
valuation date
Goodwin v. Goodwin
2010 WL 669244 (Tenn. App.)
US
State Court
Tennessee
Court of Appeals
Sarah Y Sheppeard
Janice Smith (wife); Richard Ray (husband)
Swiney

Summary

Divorce experts diverged by more than $1 million in valuing steel business, and court adopts the larger value based on thorough expert evidence and compliance with the correct valuation date under applicable law.
Goodwin v. Goodwin
PDF, Size: 138 KB

See Also

Divorce Experts Diverge by More Than $1 Million—But Only One Used Correct Valuation Date

Legal and Court Case Update
May 2010

Divorce experts diverged by more than $1 million in valuing steel business, and court adopts the larger value based on thorough expert evidence and compliance with the correct valuation date under applicable law.

This article also appears in:
Business Valuation in Divorce Case Law Compendium
Business Valuation in Divorce Case Law Compendium - Fifth Edition