Schickner v. Schickner

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
April 16, 2015

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. (3,971 words)   Add to Cart >>
Need help? Contact us:
1-503-479-8200 ext 2 or sales@bvresources.com
8042 Offices and Clinics of Optometrists
621320 Offices of Optometrists
marital dissolution/divorce
capitalization rate, discount for lack of marketability (DLOM), minority interest, professional practice, equitable distribution, community property, discount for lack of control (DLOC)
Schickner v. Schickner
2015 Ariz. App. LEXIS 48
US
State Court
Arizona
Court of Appeals
John Pinto, Stephen Koons (husband); Calvin Swartley (wife)
Brown

Summary

Appeals court says state law does not bar use of minority share discount in divorce cases and declines to impose a bright-line rule; rather, the trial court has to consider interest holder’s level of control and likelihood of sale before use of discount.
Schickner v. Schickner
PDF, Size: 484 KB

See Also

No Automatic Bar to Minority Discount in Divorce Cases

Legal and Court Case Update
July 2015

Appeals court says state law does not bar use of minority share discount in divorce cases and declines to impose a bright-line rule; rather, the trial court has to consider interest holder’s level of control and likelihood of sale before use of discount.

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