Table of Contents

• Chapter 1.  10 Time Tested Ways to Build a Defensible Divorce Valuation
• Chapter 2. A Dozen 'Don'ts' to Help Survive a Divorce Engagement

Section I.  Divorce and Goodwill

• Chapter 3. In Divorce, Who Owns the Goodwill? A New Analysis and Approach
  By Alan Zipp, CPA, ABV, CVA, CBA, CFE, JD
  In Divorce, Who Owns the Goodwill? A Response
  By R. James Alerding, CPA/ABV, ASA
• Chapter 4. Simplified MUM for Determining Personal Goodwill
  By Thomas Gillmore, CPA, CFE, CVA
• Chapter 5.  Attorney's Slant on Three Methods to Estimate Personal Goodwill
• Chapter 6.  Charting Goodwill Jurisprudence
  By Sylvia Golden, Esq., Executive Legal Editor

Section II. Divorce and the Double Dip

• Chapter 7.  The Persistent Problem of the "Double Dip"
  By Shannon Pratt and Alina Niculita
• Chapter 8.  The Double Dip is Often a Misconception
  By Robert W. Levis, CPA/ABV, ASA
• Chapter 9.  Chips and Salsa:  The Double Dip Debate
  By Don DeGrazia, CPA/ABV/CFF, and Kim Willoughby, JD

Section III. Divorce and Fair Value

• Chapter 10.  Fair Value and Divorce

Section IV. Divorce and Tax Affecting

• Chapter 11. Analyzing the History of Tax Affecting Business Value in Divorce
  By Marc Bello, CPA/ABV, CVA, CFFA, MST

Section V.  Divorce and Active/Passive Appreciation

• Chapter 12.  Demographic Trends: Apportioning the Active and Passive Components
  By Ashok Abbott, MBA, Ph.D.
• Chapter 13.  A Quantitative Model Evolves for Determining Passive Appreciation
  By Ashok Abbott, MBA, Ph.D.

Section VI. Case Law Digests

Look Inside the Compendium >>

• A.C. v. J.O.
  In divorce case, New York trial court prefers excess earnings over price-to-revenue method to value wife’s dental practice, because the former accounts for the business’s lack of tangible assets—a fact specific to professional offices in New York where re ...
• Ackerman v. Ackerman
  In reasonable compensation case, trial court discredits salary surveys not sufficiently “fine-tuned” to area and type of practice of the subject practitioner.
• Adams v. Adams
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court rejects direct capitalization method for valuing hedge fund partnership interest, finding DCF method is more appropriate, plus tax-affecting.
• Ahern v. Ahern
  Maine clarifies its position on enterprise versus personal goodwill.
• Alexander v. Alexander
  In divorce case, appellate court upholds valuation of a small agriculture-related company based on the capitalization of net income approach; record supports court-appointed expert’s capitalization rate, including his selection of the supply-side equity r ...
• Alsup v. Alsup
  At issue is the valuation of the couple's daycare business.
• Amaraneni v. Amaraneni
  Court finds doctor/husband has no professional goodwill in his urgent care clinic, when it is not an extension of his medical practice and he provides no regular, specific services there.
• Anderson v. Anderson
  Court denies “marketability” discount for costs of selling a minority interest (broker’s fees, advertising, etc.).
• Andrew Simon Mickler v. Terry J. Mickler, et al.
  The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s valuation of the husband’s medical practice, including goodwill. It rejected the husband’s argument that personal goodwill should not be included in the valuation of his practice because it was not ...
• Anita Marie Batt v. Stuart Alan Batt
  The Oregon Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's decision, applying a lack of marketability discount to the value of minority interest in a family farm. The court noted that the discount was inappropriate when there was no intention of disposing of ...
• Anne C. Thill v. Ronald E. Thill
  The Missouri Court of Appeals reversed a lower court's valuation of one company when that valuation considered depreciation of a second, related corporation. It concluded that when two related companies are valued together, the valuation must consider bo ...
• Antolik v. Harvey
  One issue in this case was the value of husband's chiropractor business.
• Arn v. Arn
  Issue is the valuation of husband's interest in wine company where he originally purchased 20% interest and later purchased remaining 80% but sale was still in escrow.
• Augoshe v. Lehman
  "Splitting the difference" between two disparate appraisals is not an acceptable valuation method in divorce.
• Aukeman v. Aukeman
  Which is more credible: owner’s testimony regarding weekly sales forecasts or the forecasts he prepared to secure financing?
• Balicki v Balicki
  Court declines to distinguish personal from enterprise goodwill where the parties failed to produce evidence of personal goodwill component at trial.
• Balicki v. Balicki
  Pennsylvania statute requires family courts to consider tax and other cost ramifications associated with each asset to be divided in divorce.
• Baltrusis v. Baltrusis
  A major issue in this trial was whether a marketability discount was appropriate.
• Banchefsky v. Banchefsky
  Divorce court limits professional goodwill of dental practice to the value of a non-compete agreement allocated in the sale of the practice during the proceedings.
• Barlow V. Barlow
  111 Or. App. 179, 826 P.2d 18 (Or. Ct. App. Feb. 12, 1992), Judge Richardson, review denied, 313 Or. 299, 832 P.2d 455 (Or. June 5, 1992).
• Barone v. Barone
  At issue is whether the trial court erred in accepting the valuation of appellee's expert concerning his medical practice.
• Barth v. Barth
  One issue in this case was whether it was proper for the expert to use the income approach when valuing a corporation.
• Barth v. Barth
  Appellate court affirms “sizeable” discounts for real estate development companies, including ones for bulk sale and carrying costs.
• Barton v. Barton
  Georgia Supreme Court considers whether stock price in buy-sell agreement binds parties in divorce.
• Bass v. Bass
  Issue is whether valuation of the goodwill of bonding business is speculative in light of the absence of any real market value for bail bonding businesses.
• Berenberg v. Berenberg
  At issue is the valuation of husband's stock in his family's business.
• Berg v. Young
  Appeals court says trial court erred in interpreting prenuptial agreement but reached correct result when it rejected wife’s claim to enhanced value of husband’s separate interest in car dealership by ruling appreciation in value was passive, not active.
• Berger v. Berger
  Appeals court says nonexpert testimony on a real-world offer to buy owner-spouse’s company was relevant and, therefore, admissible because it provided valuation evidence based on market approach; court remands for rehearing on all valuation testimony.
• Bernier v. Bernier (I)
  Massachusetts Supreme Court applies tax affecting analysis to valuation of subchapter S corporations in divorce.
• Bernier v. Bernier (II)
  Massachusetts Court of Appeals remands the case—for the second time—to the trial court for an appropriate valuation of the parties’ S corporations, including a tax affecting according to the “Kessler metric” (adopted from the Delaware Chancery Court).
• Bersin v. Golonka
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the value of husband's 1000 shares of non-voting stock in the Sanger Clinic, P.A., where he was a senior partner.
• Bertuca v. Bertuca
  Court adjusts income/capitalization of earnings approach for complicated valuation of fast food franchise partnership.
• Bobrow v. Bobrow
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the value of the husband's partnership interest in the accounting firm of Ernst & Young ("E&Y").
• Bohme v. Bohme
  In a divorce case involving dental practice, appeals court says using income stream “as a tool” to value a professional business and then using it “as actual income for a spousal support calculation” does not per se amount to impermissible double dipping.
• Boyd v. Boyd
  Issues were characterization of stock options as marital property, valuation date, and valuation of stock options.
• Brave v. Brave (I)
  State appellate court finds “professional license goodwill” exception, which treats personal goodwill as professional spouse’s separate property, applies to “unique,” successful restaurant and directs trial court to determine how much of the business’s go ...
• Brave v. Brave (II)
  State high court rejects per se extension of personal goodwill concept to nonprofessional businesses and finds in case at issue restaurant’s valuation indicates goodwill is marketable and thus corporate and subject to marital distribution.
• Brickner v. Brickner
  Frustrated by lack of consensus among expert valuations of marital business, Ohio Court of Appeals adopts the only valuation (cost approach) where the experts had limited agreement.
• Brooks v. Brooks
  Fair market value standard requires court to consider more than just the appraised values of real estate held by the husband’s minority interest in LLCs; it requires consideration of marketability and minority discounts, plus transfer restrictions.
• Brown v. Brown
  Issue is the classification of husband's interest in the family business as marital property.
• Brown v. Brown
  Issues were value husband's interest in the family florist business, whether stock should be discounted for minority interest or marketability, and whether stock was a gift.
• Browne v. Browne, Jr.
  Appeals court defers to trial court’s method of applying one expert’s cap rate to other expert’s cash flow analysis when valuing spouse’s interest in closely held company and says “purposeful” application of minority discount has support among valuators.
• Brumback v. Brumback
  The issue in this case was the division of a law firm interest.
• Bunkers v. Bunkers
  Ohio court considers joining majority rule on distinguishing enterprise from personal goodwill in valuing professional associations in divorce.
• Burks v. Burks
  1991 Tenn. App. LEXIS 73 (Tenn. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 1991). Judge Farmer.
• Burnett v. Burnett
  State Court of Appeals affirms expert’s use of excess earnings method to determine value of husband’s interest in large medical practice finding the calculation properly separated personal from enterprise goodwill.
• Burstein v. Burstein
  Appeals court affirms trial court’s valuation of medical practices based on buyout provisions where wife’s expert made no attempt to ascertain businesses’ FMV by any other valuation method.
• Burton v. Mooneyham
  Divorce court discredits conflict between expert’s testimony at trial and then a rehearing, when he originally said the husband’s rental car business was worth a net $200,000 as of 2008 but then later changed his opinion to say it was worth nothing at tha ...
• Bussa v. Bussa
  Divorce court discounts for flawed comparables and lack of control in valuation of four related companies.
• Butler v. Butler
  This appeal involves the issue of valuation, for purposes of equitable distribution, of a spouse's business interest in an accounting firm.
• Buzzanell v. Miller
  A professional practice not established for a time sufficient for the existence of goodwill to be valued using capitalization of excess earnings. Wife's valuation upheld.
• Campbell v. Campbell
  Appellate court affirms trial court finding that expert who relied on “estimates” of asset value, provided by the husband with an unreliable memory, was not credible.
• Carlson v. Carlson
  At issue is the methodology employed by the trial court in determining the value of two marital assets, a ten-acre tract of land and plaintiff's medical practice.
• Caveney v. Caveney
  Massachusetts Court of Appeals confirms that the fair value standard in divorce cases precludes application of any discount, either for lack of marketability or lack of control, for any closely held company, even highly restricted shares in family owned b ...
• Cerretani v. Cerretani
  Wife challenged the trial court's qualification of husband's witness as an expert witness and discounting husband's interest by 30%.
• Champion v. Champion
  The issue in this case was whether the trial judge erred in valuing of the husband's business.
• Chandler v. Chandler
  At issue is the valuation of the restaurant business and calculation of husband's income for support purposes.
• Charles v. Charles
  California appellate court affirms trial court’s rejection of husband’s motion to value the community business at separation rather than at trial; the latter is the presumed valuation date under state law and the husband’s request was not “good cause,” bu ...
• Charles W. Rush v. Latresa A. Rush
  The Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court’s decision to value a service company inclusive of goodwill. The court reached this conclusion based on expert testimony that the business had little personal goodwill and evidence that the owner-sha ...
• Chattree v. Chattree
  Court admits expert’s testimony despite his failure to appear for scheduled deposition where husband’s refusal to provide necessary corporate information delayed expert’s completion of the business valuation and says any error in the opinion was “invited”
• Chesterfield v. Nash
  At issue is whether the professional goodwill in defendant's dental practice is separate property.
• Christians v. Christians
  At issue is the valuation of husband's flying trapeze business.
• Clukey v. Clukey
  At issue is the valuation of husband's chiropractic business.
• Clymer v. Clymer (I)
  Issue is whether the trial court should have reconsidered the entire property division because the property division had been vacated on prior appeal.
• Clymer v. Clymer (II)
  At issue is whether the trial court properly determined reasonable compensation in its analysis of the value of Mr. Clymer's interest in the law practice.
• Colclasure v. Colclasure
  State Supreme Court finds trial court erred in valuing husband’s business interest based on buy-out agreement the parties ignored; on remand, valuation must meet statutory requirement of a fair and just division.
• Cole v. Cole
  This appeal involves the financial aspects of the dissolution of a twenty-five-year marriage. The trial court divided the marital estate, including the husband's interest in his business.
• Cole v. Cole
  The parties were married in 1976. In the mid-1980s, the husband became associated with the Boozman-Hof Clinic, the Boozman-Hof Surgery Center, and the Genesis Partnership.
• Conner v. Conner
  At issue is the valuation of husband's radiology business.
• Conway v. Conway
  At issue is the goodwill value of the husband's medical practice.
• Corporations purchased before marriage not part of marital estate
  The value of two corporations, Yalesville Plating and Metals Processing, Inc. and ADR, Ltd. , arose from the marital property distribution in this marital dissolution. Yalesville spun off ...
• Cox v. Cox
  Court confirms appropriateness of applying a 50% marketability discount to the post-marital value of a steel business but not to its premarital valuation, citing the changes in the steel industry and company-specific factors.
• Crews v. Crews
  Appeals court rejects business goodwill award to the husband as a community asset, finding there was no goodwill in the business entities, as the trial court well knew; the determination is based entirely on the expectancy of husband’s future earnings.
• Crider v. Crider
  Appeals court affirms trial court’s above fair market value determinations regarding husband’s interests in various family businesses and the resulting equalization judgment but rejects trial court’s means with which to enforce payment of judgment.
• Crismon v. Crismon
  At issue is the valuation of husband's interest in two convenience stores and certain commercial property.
• Crowder v. Crowder
  Wife appealed from an amended judgment, which distributed the appreciation in the value of husband's company.
• Cummings v. Cummings
  Arkansas court precludes deduction for "personal goodwill" when valuing a family owned, commercial business in divorce.
• D. K. MacDonald v. CIR
  The Tax Court concluded that an insurance agent did not received any goodwill in the liquidation of his insurance corporation. It found that the goodwill was the personal property of the agent absent a non-compete agreement.
• D.K.H. v. L.R.G.
  The Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District affirmed the valuation of an interest in a medical practice. The practice was valued under the fair market value standard under the third-party sale provision of the practice’s restricted shareholders’ agree ...
• Dahill v. Dahill
  Issue was the value of husband's interest in a closely held company, and whether the shareholder agreement value was controlling.
• Davidson v. Davidson (II)
  Trial court did not err by excluding proffered appraisal expert; even though he had 30 years of accounting and real estate experience, he lacked a college degree and had never been qualified as a BV expert.
• Debra Rattee v. Steven Rattee
  The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s treatment of the husband’s compensation and the application of combined lack of marketability and minority interest discounts in the valuation of his business interest. The lower court reduced his ...
• DeCosse v. DeCosse
  At issue is the valuation of husband's interest in a furniture company.
• Denton v. Denton
  At issue is the valuation of husband's medical practice.
• Desalle v. Gentry
  The valuation issue in this marital dissolution focused on the classification of the goodwill in the business ...
• Dickert v. Dickert
  South Carolina declines to follow majority rule on disposition of professional practice goodwill in divorce.
• Doe v. Roe
  Court confirms trial court’s application of double discounts (marketability and minority) and evidence of prior sales to value several closely held interests in divorce.
• Dowell v. Dowell
  A Missouri divorce court creates “blue sky” value from widely disparate evidence.
• Drumheller v. Drumheller
  Divorce court disallows minority discounts in valuation of husband’s 10% interest in printing company and his 33% interest in real estate holding company.
• Duboise v. Duboise
  The issue in this case was the assignment of goodwill in a trust in the context of a divorce.
• Dugan v. Dugan
  The issue in this case was the value of an attorney's goodwill in a professional corporation ...
• Duke v. Duke
  Appellate court affirms $5.4 million value for business that supports emergency services department in hospitals, finding that it appropriately accounted for the risks of losing customer contracts as well as the absence of a non-compete agreement with the ...
• Ebner v. Ebner
  Lacking financial documentation, tax returns, and cooperative owner-spouse, expert still makes credible valuation of small, sole proprietorship.
• Edward R. Bertholet v. Linda Bertholet
  The Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the lower court's valuation of a bail bond business because the lower court's valuation included an amount for personal goodwill, which is not includable in the marital estate. It affirmed the lower court's choice of ...
• Elizabeth P. Schiro v. Joseph A. Schiro
• Ellington v. Ellington
  The primary issue was the value of the parties cotton trading business, Noble Ellington Cotton Company, Inc. (NECC).
• Elliott v. Elliott
  Trial court errs by valuing the husband’s minority interest in a family held limited liability corporation by reference to the underlying real property, when there was no evidence that the husband could access the property or its income.
• Ellis v. Ellis
  At issue is the equitable distribution of the parties' marital property, particularly the appreciation in value of plaintiff's stock in the business.
• Elvina V. Caldas v. Carlos M. Caldas
  The Ohio Court of Appeals, Second District affirmed a lower court's application of a 75 percent discount for lack of marketability to a controlling interest in a defense contract. The discount considered factors such as the key role played at the company ...
• Endres v. Endres
  Issue was whether the trial court erred in both recognizing and valuing enterprise goodwill assigned to the concrete business.
• Entingh v. Entingh
  Disputes over discounts, inclusion of assets, complicates valuation of closely-held stock in divorce.
• Erp v. Erp
  Court considers a per se ban on marketability discounts in divorce cases.
• Eslami v. Eslami
  At issue was the valuation of husband's medical practice.
• Evenson v. Evenson
  Court takes volatility of crop market when valuing insurance agency.
• Experts in Indiana agree on DCF discount rate, projections at issue
  This marital dissolution trial court case involved the value of 100% of the stock of a distributor of parts for the repair and maintenance of food preparation equipment. Dan Van Vleet test ...
• Farmer v. Farmer
  Washington State Supreme Court rejects absolute rule for valuing converted employment stock options in divorce, deferring to trial courts’ broad authority to assess expert valuation of the options, including its reference to the tort framework of measurin ...
• Fausch v. Fausch
  The valuation issues in this marital dissolution were whether a discount for lack of marketability should have been applied to husband's minority interests in two medical-practice businesses, and whether a buy-sell provision in a third business was determ ...
• Ferguson v. Ferguson
  At issue is the marketability discount applied to the valuation of the husband's interest in a manufacturing business.
• Ferraro v. Ferraro
  At issue is the admittance of evidence and the valuation of husband's business interest in sporting goods stores.
• Fexa v. Fexa
  Issue is whether the trial court erred in excluding any goodwill value from the valuation of husband's dental practice.
• Fickle v. Fickle
  Divorce court considers treatment of embedded capital gains tax when valuing real estate holding company by net asset valuation method.
• Finby v. Finby
  Appeals court says financial analyst spouse’s ability to induce clients to follow her when switching employer resembles goodwill in professional practices and represents a divisible community asset; trial court erred when it found analyst’s book of busine ...
• Fisher v. Fisher
  At issue is the trial court's split of the couple's Fisher Industries stock and whether wife's minority shares should have been discounted.
• Flauto v. Flauto
  At issue is the valuation of husband's accounting business.
• Foppe v. Foppe
  Husband appeals value of a restaurant that included only a portion of his expert report’s (cash flow) without accounting for the other portion (gross sales).
• Ford v. Ford
  One issue in this case was the valuation of goodwill in a medical practice.
• Frazier v. Frazier
  At issue is the valuation of the couple's furniture business.
• Freihage v. Freihage
  Appeals court acknowledges impossibility of duplicating calculations underlying trial court’s valuation of husband’s LLC owning McDonald’s franchises but surmises result hinges on treatment of funds from family trust to LLC as debt, rather than equity.
• Frett v. Frett
• Gallo v. Gallo
  Appeals court finds Ohio statute requires trial court to consider income from all sources in calculating spousal support and overrules Heller I to extent Heller imposes a flat prohibition against double dipping; mandate is to ensure fairness and equity.
• Garcia v. Garcia
  Divorce court finds restrictive shareholder agreement not binding on valuation of medical practice, although question of discounts due to restrictions depends on particular facts of the cases.
• Gardner v. Gardner
  At issue in this marital dissolution appeal was the value of husband’s medical practice.
• Garman v. Garman
  Court rejects doctor’s claims that by departing from medical practice just before divorce, his $15,000 buy-sell payout limits practice value, crediting instead a net asset value, adjusted for routine quarterly bonuses.
• Gaskill v. Robbins (I)
  Kentucky considers joining the majority of jurisdictions that distinguishes personal from enterprise goodwill.
• Gaskill v. Robbins (II)
  Kentucky Supreme Court holds with majority rule that distinguishes enterprise goodwill (marital property, divisible) from personal goodwill (non-marital, non-divisible) in valuing professional practices for purposes of divorce.
• Gaskill v. Robbins (III)
  Court of Appeals confirms trial court’s reliance on a valuation performed closer to date of petition (rather than date of decree), finding a variety of factors in support, including spouse’s dissipation of funds from the sole proprietorship.
• Gaydos v. Gaydos
  At issue is what distinction exists between goodwill and going concern value in the context of valuing a sole proprietorship for equitable distribution purposes.
• Geaccone v. Geaccone
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the value of husband's dental practice.
• Gentile v. Gentile
  Appellate court affirms lower court’s Fair Market Value (FMV) determination of husband’s S corp. medical practice, which incorporates goodwill value the wife’s expert calculated based on the Goodwill Registry.
• Gibbons v. Gibbons
  At issue is the value of stock in a logging corporation.
• Gibbons v. Gibbons
  619 A.2d 432 (R.I. Jan. 27, 1993). Per curiam.
• Gifford v Gifford
  New York appellate court finds trial court’s spousal support determination violated double counting rule where expert valued husband’s solely owned engineering company based on an income approach and the business was a service business.
• Gill v. Gill
  In this marital dissolution, the issue was the value of wife’s interest in her CPA practice (CPA practice) and the value of the couple’s funeral home (Gill LLC) that was operated by husband.
• Gohl v. Gohl
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the appropriate valuation date for valuing the couples' business, Golight, Inc., which had won a patent infringement suit against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
• Golden v. Golden
  One issue was whether goodwill was community property.
• Goldfarb v. Yelton
  Appellate court affirms trial court’s decision to apportion most of the stock sale proceeds the husband reaped during marriage in connection with a company he set up before marriage to the community under Pereira, finding that during marriage, he became t ...
• Gomez v. Gomez
  A major point of contention between the parties in this marital dissolution was the value of husband's radiology practice.
• Goodson v. Goodson
  In this marital dissolution case, wife owned Judy's Painting Services. The trial court determined that the business was worth at least $100,000, but failed to place a specific value on the business because wife failed to keep adequate records.
• Goodwin v. Goodwin
  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.
• Goswami v. Goswami
  The trial court performed its own valuation of husband's medical practice, which was higher than both experts values. The court of appeals affirmed.
• Gottsacker v. Gottsacker
  Issues were whether wife's interest in an S corp account was marital property, and whether the trial court erred in applying a marketability discount to her limited partnership interest.
• Graves v. Tomlinson
  Husband presents two experts to value wife’s three health care businesses, a forensic accountant to normalize the records and a business valuation expert to assess value under all three approaches.
• Grelier v. Grelier (I)
  Alabama court of appeals declines to address application of statutory fair value in divorce cases, holding that wife stipulated to fair market value standard at trial and fully litigated applicability of discounts within that context.
• Grelier v. Grelier (II)
  This court's opinion of December 19, 2008, is withdrawn, and the following is substituted therefor.
• Grow v. Grow
  When the original valuation date preceded the 2008-2009 economic crisis, trial court erred by failing to consider its impact on the value of the business prior to trial.
• Growth rate of 4% conservative for expanding business
  Facts The issue before the trial court was the value of the husband's 33% interest in a closely held aviation coating business Airborn Coatings . Valuation evidence The corpor ...
• Gupta v. Gupta
  Trial court appropriately values three rural medical practices and imaging center at $780,000 based on expert testimony that includes marketability discount and excludes professional goodwill.
• Halliday v. Halliday
  Trial court did not overvalue husband’s interests in various businesses since it applied a DLOC whenever the husband did not have a 100% interest in the company and a DLOM that was consistent with expert testimony, state Court of Appeals finds.
• Hamelink v. Hamelink
  Appeals court agrees that in valuing husband’s S corp for marital distribution “national case law” (Kessler, Bernier) supports his expert’s tax affecting but says it must defer to trial court’s decision to adopt competing expert’s position not to tax affe ...
• Hamilton v. Hamilton
  The primary issue in this case was valuation and division of the appreciation in the value of husband's business.
• Hancock v. Hancock
  Insurance agency valuation turns on renewal rate, discounts, distributions, and contingent liabilities.
• Hanson v. Hanson
  The issue in this case was the classification of a professional practice's goodwill as a marital asset in Missouri.
• Hanson v. Hanson
  Do marketability discounts apply when divorce causes controlling spouse to “buy out” minority spouse?
• Hanusin v. Hanusin
  In a divorce case involving a closely held corporation, the appeals court finds trial court was justified to credit a 2004 stock purchase agreement instead of a 2012 settlement when valuing husband’s shares; the buyout was a true arms-length transaction ...
• Harold Tatum Jr. v. Patricia L. Tatum
  The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the valuation of a specialty machine business. The company was valued using the straight capitalization method and a 20 percent discount for lack of marketability. The court rejected in part the valuations performed ...
• Hartley v. Hartley
  Court of Appeals overturns trial court’s order limiting discovery of law firm records to production of buy-sell agreement, finding the applicable “fair value” standard requires production of all relevant pricing information in divorce.
• Hartline v. Hartline
  Appeals court says distinction between professional goodwill and future earnings capacity “evanesces” when valuing solo professional practice; trial court erred in adopting value based on guideline transaction method that considered professional goodwill.
• Hayden v. Pittendrigh
  Court dismisses wife’s claim fraud against the husband, finding that she accepted $1 million for her share in the marital business, based on a limited appraisal, and waited too long after finding out the company sold for $54 million to bring her suit.
• Haymes v. Haymes
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the value of the husband's minority interest in a real estate partnership.
• Haynes v. Haynes
  Divorce court adopts a broker’s net asset value for licensing bureau, finding that its lack of transferability was key applying to this approach versus a BV expert’s capitalization/excess earnings analysis.
• Head v. Head
  One issue in this case was the value of community stock in a family corporation.
• Held v. Held
  The issue in this marital dissolution case was whether the trial court correctly disallowed enterprise goodwill in valuing husband's insurance agency, Joseph Held Company.
• Helfer v. Helfer (I)
  Courts that follow majority rule re: distinction of enterprise/professional goodwill in divorce need to make a compete record of valuation findings and rationale.
• Helfer v. Helfer (II)
  Trial court has the discretion to rely primarily on rebuttal expert’s testimony to assign a zero value to the enterprise goodwill of a chiropractic practice.
• Heller v. Heller (I)
  Court of Appeals determines, based on the nature of the husband’s interest in an S corporation, that the state marital dissolution statutes prohibit the double dip; i.e., the trial court awarding the wife an interest in the business and then awarding spou ...
• Heller v. Heller (II)
  Court of Appeals determines, based on the nature of the husband’s interest in an S corporation, that the state marital dissolution statutes prohibit the double dip; i.e., the trial court awarding the wife an interest in the business and then awarding spou ...
• Heller v. Heller (III)
  Court of Appeals ratifies its prior decisions concerning the prohibition against the double-dip in this case, but reverses the trial court’s support award as unreasonable and unsupported use of his business profits.
• Herbrand v. Herbrand
  Divorce court finds husband’s expert lacks independence and credibility when ignoring a contract in insurance company valuation.
• Hershewe v. Hershewe
  At issue is the valuation of goodwill of husband's law practice.
• Hess v. Hess
  Maine considers characterization of goodwill value of a professional practice.
• Hester v. Hester
  Divorce court prefers market approach to income approach for valuation of electrical company, finding market data supplied sufficient comparables.
• Hill v. Hill
  Trial court was justified in disregarding any commercial goodwill in husband’s interest in a professional practice and relying on partnership agreement, Texas appeals court finds, where goodwill is not accessible and expert testimony as to its existence a ...
• Hissa v. Hissa (I)
  Issue was whether trial court erred in preventing husband's counsel from referring to the expert's report during questioning and excluding the report.
• Hissa v. Hissa (II)
  Appellate court upholds $553,000 valuation for medical practice based on trial court’s finding that by withholding financial information from wife’s expert, husband ended up discrediting his own expert’s valuation.
• Hoebelheinrich v. Hoebelheinrich
  At issue in this case was the value of husband’s medical practice.
• Houchens v. Boschert
  Issues were whether trial court abused its discretion when it valued wife's interest in company, accepting husband's expert and by failing to exclude her personal goodwill.
• Hough v. Hough
  The wife appealed various financial aspects of the judgment, including the valuation of the parties' vending business.
• Howell v. Howell (I)
  At issue is the valuation of the goodwill of husband's law partnership interest.
• Howell v. Howell (II)
  At issue is whether the trial court erred in valuing husband's interest in his law firm.
• Huebner v. Huebner
  At issue is the valuation of wife's jewelry business.
• Hugh v. Hugh
  Appeals court finds error in trial court’s refusal to value business; even if limited data caused expert’s estimate to fall short of AICPA standard, it was based on the market approach, a “sound and reasonable method to value a closely-held business.”
• Hurley v. Hurley
  At issue is the value of goodwill of husband's professional practice.
• Iacampo v. Oliver-Iacampo
  Appellate court affirms expert testimony regarding factors that contributed to active vs. passive appreciation of the marital business; even though his report didn’t make specific conclusions, it did apply a 10% discount for lack of control, which, while ...
• In re Honer
  Court upholds expert’s idiosyncratic valuation approach based on ascertaining “marital value” of community’s grocery stores as opposed to stores’ “investment value”; since the stores were not sold, valuation properly captured their value to owner spouse.
• In re Marriage of Alexander
  Court accepts “Multiattribute Utility Model” in calculating percentages of personal and enterprise goodwill for a professional practice.
• In re Marriage of Armour
  Appellate court reverses the trial court’s in-kind division of 50,000 shares of company stock, finding that wife’s share would be redeemed at below-market, formula price while husband would continue to enjoy dividends and stock appreciation.
• In re Marriage of Baker
  Trial court erred by excluding the value of a noncompete attributable to the institutional goodwill of surgical practice.
• In re Marriage of Baker
  Court of Appeals affirms finding that buy-sell agreement limits spouse’s interest in medical clinic to $1,000.
• In re Marriage of Barten
  Appellate court permits valuation of professional’s earning capacity (goodwill) in appraisal of small law practice when there was no child or spousal support at issue.
• In re Marriage of Bauer
  Appellate court upholds Business Reference Guide rules of thumb for valuing a physical therapy practice at 1.0 times gross income.
• In re Marriage of Becker (I)
  Appeals court corrects valuation for failure to account for husband’s individual ownership of real property (stone quarries) leased to his quarrying business.
• In re Marriage of Becker (II)
  Court reconsiders previous opinion; accepts revised appraisal value.
• In re Marriage of Blazer
  California appellate court declines to adopt the prohibition against “double- dipping” in divorce.
• In re Marriage of Bruns
  Divorce court confirms value of dental practice, excluding goodwill, is midway between a broker’s value and a BV expert’s.
• In re Marriage of Cantarella
  Court rejects accountant’s preliminary valuation as lacking sufficient financial support to evidence value of marital business.
• In re Marriage of Crosetto
  At issue is the valuation of husband's appraisal business.
• In re Marriage of Devries
  Divorce court finds AICPA BV standards (SSVS-1) instructive but not binding on valuation of goodwill.
• In re Marriage of Erpelding
  Appellate court confirms trial court’s discounting of hog confinement facilities based on testimony of industry expert regarding “troubled” state of the industry; and further, it appropriately excluded considerations of tax consequences.
• In re Marriage of Ferkel
  The appellate court affirmed $42,000 valuation of the wife's solo dental practice and rejected approach by the husband's expert, which included "goodwill and other irrelevant factors."
• In re Marriage of Frawley
  The issue in this marital dissolution was the value of husband’s dog breeding business.
• In re Marriage of Gelman
  A medical partnership’s exclusive contract to provide anesthesiology services to a hospital is an intangible asset, but since buy-sell agreement limits wife’s interest to $1.00, the court finds she has no ownership interest in the business and the contrac ...
• In re Marriage of Gerhard
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the value of husband's bar, Knicker's Saloon.
• In re Marriage of Gunn
  One issue in this case was the valuation of husband's shares in a professional corporation.
• In re Marriage of Haefele
  In valuing inventory original artwork, must divorce court assign reasonable salary to spouse-owner?
• In re Marriage of Hagar
  Court declines to accept “calculation of value” by CPA expert in divorce, because it relied on industry rules of thumb and lacked required level of judgment compared to complete valuation.
• In re Marriage of Hanscam
  Court affirms reliance on income approach to value solo CPA practice, including distinction between personal and enterprise goodwill, but rejects trial court’s finding that 25% of the firm was the husband’s separate property, based on his demonstrated int ...
• In re Marriage of Hartung
  Court rejects income approach for valuing interest in business with low bar of entry and few repeat customers; court also says asset-based valuation following Section 179 tax treatment understates true value of the company and requires upward adjustment.
• In re Marriage of Hashemian
  California approves excess earnings and “formula” approach to valuing atypical life insurance firm, based on industry compensation and revenue data.
• In re Marriage of Head
  One issue in this case was the valuation of a medical practice.
• In re Marriage of Herlitzke
  Divorce court tax affects husband’s minority S Corp interest, and declines to adopt buy-sell value.
• In re Marriage of Heroy
  Divorce court considers combined discounts for lack of marketability and control for husband’s interest in real estate and manufacturing concern.
• In re Marriage of Huff
  At issue was the value of husband's interest in his law firm.
• In re Marriage of Hull
  One issue in this case was the valuation of goodwill in husband's anesthesiology practice.
• In re Marriage of Jackson
  Court finds no appreciable value in husband's law practice, reversing trial court's improper characterization of cash account as asset instead of income.
• In re Marriage of Johnson
  Appeals court strikes divorce ruling adopting income-based valuation of enterprise value of owner’s financial services business, valuation conflicts with data from similar transaction that occurred close to valuation date and involved owner-spouse.
• In re Marriage of Kingery
  In valuing the husband’s 25% interest in a law firm, the trial court erroneously accepted a valuation that included a “purchase acquisition cost” or “goodwill cost” derived from a buy-out of a former partner.
• In re Marriage of McTiernan
  At trial, a popular movie director is found to possess professional goodwill—and the California appellate court is forced to go “goodwill hunting.”
• In re Marriage of Meek-Duncomb
  Divorce court declines to credit “uncertified” business appraisal by CPA who reviewed only tax returns and Excel spreadsheets, without considering business’s assets and debts, sources of revenues and customer relationships.
• In re Marriage of Nichols
  At issue is the valuation of husband's dental practice.
• In re Marriage of Porter
  Expert successfully uses “double-dipping” argument to persuade court to adopt reasonable compensation figure for determining maintenance.
• In re Marriage of Price and Turkanis
  Court approves use of comparable sales data in valuing high-tech startup company, even though comparable transactions took place within one year after the valuation date.
• In re Marriage of Restaino
  Court of Appeals reverses the trial court’s finding that pay-outs under a law firm dissolution agreement represented income to the husband rather than his equity share in a community asset, to which the wife could claim a portion.
• In re Marriage of Rodenback
  Appellate court disavows day-of-trial valuation by expert that used the husband’s “off the cuff” forecasts, preferring value based on historical earnings, without consideration of the tax burden the husband would have to bear in making the equalization pa ...
• In re Marriage of Ross
  Divorce court considers proper period of earnings to estimate goodwill value of law practice under excess earnings approach.
• In re Marriage of Steele
  At issue is the valuation of husband's stock in a closely-held business and couple's interest in a limited partnership.
• In re Marriage of Theurer
  California Court of Appeal confirms trial courts $2.4 million valuation of orthodontic practice, including $1.9 million goodwill but excluding patient prepayments.
• In re Marriage of Thompson
  In this marital dissolution, one issue was the value of the multiple companies owned by husband.
• In re Marriage of Zells
  At issue is whether or not a lawyer's contingent fee contracts and professional goodwill are subject to valuation, division or distribution as marital assets.
• In re Mauer
  Appeals court affirms trial court’s decision favoring asset approach for valuing owner spouse’s medical practices; unlike income approach, it avoids accounting for owner spouse’s future earning twice, in asset valuation and determination of alimony.
• In re of the Marriage of Weakley
  At issue is whether the trial court erred by adopting an expert witness's opinion as to the valuation of husband's stock in his business by including goodwill and by it failing to deduct for sales commissions in arriving at the value of equipment.
• In re the Marraige of Roger I. Ceilley v. Katherine L. Ceilley
  The Iowa Court of Appeals considered the valuation of a medical practice. The appellate court affirmed the lower court’s asset approach valuation because it found that medical practices in Des Moines did not include goodwill in the transaction price and t ...
• In re the Marriage of Banning
  Husband contends that the trial court erred in valuing TAM Corporation, in which he is a majority owner, because of the capitalization rate used.
• In re the Marriage of Covell
  The issue in this marital dissolution case was whether husband’s real estate and business investments provided him with positive or negative income.
• In re the Marriage of Earl M. Schneider v. Jodi Ann Schneider (Schneider I)
  The Illinois Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s valuation of a dental practice. It found that the lower court erred when it excluded cash, accounts receivable, cash surrender value of life insurance, and officer loans from the value of the busine ...
• In re the Marriage of Field
• In re the Marriage of Fleege
  Issue is whether the goodwill of a dental practice is a marital asset and how it should be valued and distributed. Includes list of "Fleege factors."
• In re the Marriage of Franzen
  At issue is the valuation of the husband's interest in a closely-held food corporation.
• In re the Marriage of Gillespie
  At issue is the valuation of husband's shares in an insurance company and a covenant not to compete.
• In re the Marriage of Grim
  At issue is the valuation of husband's orthodontic practice.
• In re the Marriage of Grunsten
  At issue is the valuation of husband's marketing business.
• In re the Marriage of Harrod
  The California Court of Appeals for the Sixth District considered several issues involving the valuation of a closely held real estate developer.
• In re the Marriage of Havrilak
  At issue is the valuation of husband's co-ownership interest in an environmental engineering company.
• In re the Marriage of Hoker
  Divorce court finds that husband manipulated assets of trucking company during divorce to lower its net asset value, and discredits husband’s expert for relying on manipulated data and applying a 10% marketability discount.
• In re the Marriage of Lee
  At issue is the valuation of the couple's business.
• In re the Marriage of Lee
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the valuation of the husband's business.
• In re the Marriage of Mann
  One of the primary issues in this marital dissolution was the valuation of husband's insurance sales and financial planning business.
• In re the Marriage of Mary Ling Viviano v. John Dennis Viviano
  The Iowa Court of Appeals affirmed the valuation of a consulting business at the stipulated value of its assets. The court rejected the wife’s claim that the lower court erred in failing to assign a value to the business’s goodwill. It denied the claim be ...
• In re the Marriage of Monaghan
  Issue was whether covenant not to compete from sale of dental practice was separate or marital asset.
• In re the Marriage of Moser
  At issue is the valuation of husband's veterinary practice.
• In re the Marriage of Nancy L. Iredale v. Clifton B. Cates, III
  The California Court of Appeal, Second District affirmed the valuation of an attorney’s interest in a law partnership. The partnership interest was valued under the partnership agreement at the value of its capital account, exclusive of goodwill, accounts ...
• In re the Marriage of Peters
  Wife argued that the court erred in valuing the husband's interest in a family business at zero.
• In re the Marriage of Schleif
  At issue is the valuation of appellant's ownership interest in Wealth Enhancement Group.
• In re the Marriage of Sims
  At issue is the classification, distribution, and valuation of the family home, apartment building, and stock in a technology company.
• In re the Marriage of Thornhill (I)
  Colorado Court of Appeals considers extending statutory fair value standard—including preclusion of marketability discounts—to valuing close corporation in divorce.
• In re the Marriage of Thornhill (II)
  Colorado Supreme Court declines to adopt statutory fair value standard in marital dissolution cases.
• In re the Marriage of Tofte
  Issue was the value of husband's 10.1% interest in the family amusement park business and whether it was appropriate to apply a minority or marketability discount.
• In re the Marriage of Waddell
  APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. George Kalinski, Temporary Judge. (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, § 21.) Affirmed. Blumberg Law Corporatio ...
• In re the Marriage of Walbon
  In this marital dissolution, one of the issues was the correct valuation of husband's family trucking business, comprised of three companies.
• In re the Marriage of Watterworth
  Issue is whether court erred in valuing orthodontic practice based on formula in buy-sell agreement.
• In re the Marriage of Wilson
  Trial court's adoption of husband's expert's value of professional goodwill adopted because of expert's use of all five recognized valuation techniques.
• In re the Marriage of Zane
  Issues were whether trial court properly included all of corporation's liabilities in corporation's net value and whether court should have discounted wife's shares minority status.
• In the matter of Overbey
  Expert persuades court to adopt income approach value of insurance brokerage, when market approach and buy-sell produce artificially inflated values.
• In the Matter of the Marriage of Gay
  Appellate court affirms trial court’s determination that—despite expert evidence from both parties—the valuation of the wife’s minority shares in a closely held was too speculative, particularly when no actual buyer was likely to buy the shares; a strong ...
• Inzer v. Inzer
  Court finds that when a non-shareholder spouse signs a buy-sell agreement, she is bound by its value in divorce.
• James v. James
  Husband argued that the trial court erred in finding that stock was marital property and based the valuation of the stock on improperly admitted opinion testimony.
• Janice Blalock Yates v. William Mark Yates
  The Tennessee Court of Appeals, Western Section at Jackson, affirmed the lower court's valuation of the appreciation in a 10% interest in a family-owned retail furniture operation.
• Jeanne T. Conger v. Lawrence D. Conger
  The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s valuation of a personal service corporation engaged in software consulting. The business was valued using the holder’s interest method which maintains that a closely held business is worth more to ...
• Jensen v. Jensen
  The issue in this case was one of first impression in Florida: whether unvested stock options received during the marriage are marital property.
• Joe Emmett Finney v. Teresa Jo Finney
  The Nebraska Court of Appeals considered the valuation of a controlling interest in a closely held ranching company.
• Jones v. Jones
  In this marital dissolution action, the failure of the trial court to articulate its findings as to the value of the business in dispute required remand.
• Jones v. Jones
  Husband’s expert adjusted gross sales of company due to its alleged loss of military contracts after separation, but court said he was trying to reach a lower value.
• K.B.R. v. E.P.R.
  Trial court accepts value of lending corporation based on “weighted average collectability” of outstanding loans, adjusted downward for economic uncertainties and default status of loans.
• K.T. v. M.T.
  Appeals court affirms trial court’s ruling finding that, without noncompete from owner-spouse, under FMV standard, financial advisor’s solo practice fetches only net book value of its tangible assets; most of value lies in owner-spouse’s personal goodwill ...
• Kahn v. Kahn
  Issue was the value of husband's medical practice.
• Kalisch v. Kalisch
  184 A.D.2d 751, 585 N.Y.S.2d 476 (N.Y. App. Div. June 29, 1992). Judge Thompson.
• Kapadia v. Kapadia
  Trial court did not err by accepting expert value that compared wife’s interest in chain of local sandwich stores to those found in mall and airport food courts; and by rejecting expert who valued it based on national franchise comparables.
• Kapp v. Kapp
  Appeals court reviews application of discounts for contingent liability and contingent sales costs ...
• Kathleen C. Vicario v. Paul Michael Vicario
  The Rhode Island Supreme Court found that the trial court did not err when it adopted a valuation that did not tax-affect the stock in an subchapter S corporation over the valuation that did tax-affect the business when the valuation was performed for div ...
• Keane v. Keane
  New York Supreme Court considers extending prohibition against double counting from professional licenses to tangible assets.
• Keener v. Keener (I)
  Valuation of large toy manufacturer turns on valuation of intangibles (well-known name brands) and discounts.
• Keener v. Keener (II)
  Court reverses award of intangible asset valuation for a toy company (trade names and brands), for lack of current evidence regarding their worth.
• Kehrin v. Kehrin
  Husband’s valuation expert incorrectly reduced the hard assets (cash and accounts) of an ongoing business by a personal goodwill value.
• Keig v. Keig
  State Court of Appeals values husband’s interest in a family agricultural business at $1 million, including a discount for lack of control, and finds lower court’s $250,000 Grace award to spouse to compensate for exclusion of the value of the business fro ...
• Keil v. Keil
  Appellate court finds "key man" discount duplicative when trial court already adopted a value that accounted for the business’s dependency on its sole owner.
• Kenneth O. Myers v. Nancy Myers
  The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed in part and reversed in part the lower court's valuation of the parties' home heating oil business. It affirmed the lower court's selection of the valuation date as the date of com ...
• Kerce v. Kerce
  Issue was the valuation of the parties' book import business, and the proper methodology for determining value.
• Kimberly L. Zambos v. Philip N. Zambos
  The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the valuation of a 50 percent interest in a radiology practice. The practice was valued using the capitalization of excess earnings method. The lower court applied a 30 percent discount for lack of marketability and ...
• King v. King
  Kentucky appellate court remands case for consideration of enterprise versus personal goodwill components in a medical practice, pursuant to just-passed case that conforms with majority rule on the division of professional practice goodwill in divorce.
• Kinman v. Kinman
  1992 Ark. App. LEXIS 173 (Ark. Ct. App. Mar. 4, 1992). Judge Jennings.
• Kojovic v. Goldman
  A divorce client who fails to obtain a valuation of a marital asset “has only herself to blame.”
• Kowalska-Davis v. Davis
  Massachusetts Court of Appeals acknowledge trend in that state to find an equitable solution to the problem of the double dip in divorce, involving making separate findings regarding the income of the owner-spouse from the business and the income/assets o ...
• Kricsfeld v. Kricsfeld
  At issue is the valuation of husband's diagnostic and internal medicine corporation.
• Kussatz-Jakobson v. Jakobson
  Issue is whether the trial court erred by affirming the parties’ antenuptial agreement and determining the value of a corporation owned by the parties.
• L.R.M. v. R.K.M.
  Husband also contends that the court erred in valuing his partnership interest.
• Lakin v. Lakin
  1999 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3475 (Conn. Super. Ct. Dec. 6, 1999). Judge Munro.
• Landry v. Simon
  At issue is the admittance of expert testimony.
• Lannes v. Lannes
  At issue in this marital dissolution case was the value of husband's security software company, AnnaZach Software.
• Ledwith v. Ledwith
  The issue in this marital dissolution was the value of wife’s orthodontic practice.
• Lemmen v. Lemmen
  Court of Appeals affirms minority and marketability discounts for cash-rich, closely held business in divorce; dissent urges statutory fair value standard.
• Loutts v. Loutts
  State spousal support statute does not flatly forbid double dipping, but requires courts to consider all circumstances of a particular case and principles of fairness, appellate court rules.
• Lunn v. Lunn
  Appeals court finds enterprise goodwill is not a marital asset when the business is a sole proprietorship and orders trial court to produce a valuation of husband’s solo dental practice without “consideration of professional or enterprise goodwill.”
• Mahoney-Buntzman v. Buntzman
  New York court decides which party has burden of proving valuation date for active/passive asset in dissolution case ...
• Mandell v. Mandell
  Texas court holds unsigned buy-sell agreement controls value of husband’s medical practice, a privately held professional association, in divorce.
• Manelick v. Manelick
  The primary issue was the valuation of wife's medical practice in Alaska and whether it included goodwill.
• Mary Jane Daugherty Fogarty v. Larry Joe Fogarty
  The Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s decision to treat the earnings of a business as alimony rather than as property where the only valuation evidence before the lower court were the tax returns, the business was a sole proprietorship ...
• Mary Jo Rupert v. Alonzo C. Rupert
  The Ohio Court of Appeals, Third District affirmed the trial court’s order to liquidate a business’ assets, thus, destroying the business’ goodwill, which testimony indicated had a substantial value.
• Masters v. Masters
  This appeal from the Domestic Relations Division of the Court of Common Pleas of Stark County raises two Assignments of Error: ASSIGNMENTS OF ERROR I. "THE PROPERTY DIVISION ORDERED BY T ...
• May v. May
  At issue in this case is the nature of husband's practice goodwill. Testimony by both experts at trial established the goodwill as "personal."
• McAffee v. McAffee
  At issue is the valuation of the parties' stock in Western Catering Inc. and their percentage of ownership in that closely-held business.
• McCarter v. McCarter
  Appeals court affirms trial court’s finding that all the goodwill in husband’s auction business is nontransferable where the husband is the only licensed auctioneer and the sole shareholder of the company and allows for expansion of concept of profession.
• McCulloch v. McCulloch
  Trial court abused its discretion when it assigned to wife stock in closely held company that made her a minority shareholder and when it failed to value the asset at issue; because the in-kind distribution left her with illiquid assets and no control ove ...
• McDiarmid v. McDiarmid
  At issue is the valuation of husband's partnership interest in a law firm.
• McDuffy v. McDuffy
  One of the primary issues in this marital dissolution case was the valuation of the parties' trucking business, which was started during the marriage.
• McGregor v. McGregor
  The Michigan Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s distribution of the value of a closely held hair salon business.
• McKee v. McKee
  Tennessee appellate court finds that patient records constitute professional goodwill value and are not a divisible asset in divorce.
• McRae v. McRae
  Court finds that net asset value of healthcare software company includes undeposited earnings, despite husband’s contention that the check was for future services.
• McReath v. McReath (I)
  Wisconsin appellate court holds that all salable professional and corporate goodwill in a private practice is divisible in divorce.
• McReath v. McReath (II)
  Wisconsin Supreme Court upholds the standard that all saleable goodwill in a professional practice, as evidenced by a non-competition agreement, is a divisible marital asset; and that it is not “double-counting” to base a maintenance award on the income p ...
• McSparron v. McSparron
  At issue is the valuation of husband's law license.
• Medical practice valuation includes no goodwill
  Wife appealed the judgment's division of marital property, claiming that the trial court undervalued goodwill and accounts receivable related to husband's medical practice. Facts Dur ...
• Mexic v. Mexic
  577 So. 2d 1046 (La. Ct. App. Mar. 28, 1991). Judge Lobrano.
• Michael Alan Greene v. Kelly Sue Greene
  The Ohio Court of Appeals, Fifth District, affirmed the valuation of personal service business (Xerox sales) using an asset approach. The appellate court noted that the wife did not provide the trial court with an appraisal of the business, and as such, t ...
• Michael v. Michael
  Issue was the fair market value of the parties' 92% interest in Michael Machine. Includes discussion of Revenue Ruling 59-60.
• Miller v. Miller
  Georgia Supreme Court adopts majority rule regarding disposition of goodwill value of professional practice.
• Mistretta v. Mistretta
  Court denies motion for rehearing of divorce valuation based on unforeseen economic recession of 2007 – 2008.
• Mitchell v. Mitchell
  At issue is whether there is a community property interest in the goodwill of a professional practice conducted as a partnership.
• Mitchell v. Mitchell
  One issue in this case was whether the intangible assets of husband's CPA practice were goodwill.
• Mocnik v. Mocnik
  One issue in this case was the method used for valuing goodwill in a professional corporation.
• Moffitt v. Moffitt
  At issue is the valuation of the goodwill of husband's contracting business.
• Moll v. Moll
  Issues are whether personal or professional goodwill constitute "property" or "a thing of value" and whether NY domestic relations statutes recognize goodwill as marital property.
• Monaco v. Stewart
  Kentucky court finds personal goodwill value of the husband’s 25% interest in a regional anesthesiology practice to be negligible.
• Money v. Money
  At issue is the valuation of a closely held business, child support, attorney fees, alimony, and property division.
• Montisano v. Montisano
  1993 Ohio App. LEXIS 3121 (Ohio Ct. App. June 16, 1993). Judge Quillin.
• Moore v. Moore
  In a first, state high court “cautiously” decides enterprise goodwill is marital property subject to equitable division and affirms that personal goodwill is not; court rejects claim that only professionals can develop personal goodwill in a business.
• Moore v. Moore, Inc.
  Appellate court affirms value of movie theatre businesses that falls midway between the experts’ estimates, finding that husband/owner could manipulate their costs and contracts, so wife’s expert had a basis for using industry cost standards but not indus ...
• Moretti v. Moretti
  Court finds that enterprise goodwill is marital, personal goodwill is not.
• Morton v. Morton
  In this marital dissolution, the issue was whether the trial court abused its discretion in selecting the parties' separation date as the valuation date.
• Moser v. Moser
  Trail court characterizes FLP assets as marital property in divorce, based on facts surrounding its establishment and operation.
• Mueller v. Mueller
  At issue was the value of the goodwill in husband's dental laboratory.
• Myhre v. Myhre
  Appellate court upholds valuation of husband’s business where trial court faced two equally plausible values from experienced appraisers who gave “reasoned explanations” for their differing choices as to the treatment of a year with unusually high income ...
• Nail v. Nail
  Issue is whether the personal goodwill of husband's medical practice is marital property.
• Nardini v. Nardini
  One issue in this case was the different application of the comparison method of valuation of a jointly owned fire extinguisher service business.
• Nastrom v. Nastrom
  Sharon Nastrom sought and was granted a divorce from Ned Nastrom on the ground of irreconcilable differences.
• Neuman v. Neuman
  The primary issue concerns the method adopted for determining the value of stock in a closely-held family corporation.
• Nevarez v. Nevarez
  Court accepts buy-sell value for husband’s interest in a healthcare partnership where wife fails to offer expert business appraisal.
• Nichols v. Nichols
  At issue is the valuation of husband's shareholder interest in his law firm.
• Nieman v. Nieman
  Appeals court says consideration of tax consequences related to owner-spouse’s business is “too speculative” because owner has no plan to sell in near future; trial court improperly assumed current tax rates and business interests would remain constant.
• Nowels v. Nowels
  Marital dissolution court offers “well-reasoned” resolution of conflicting S Corporation valuations ...
• Nowzaradan v. Nowzaradan
  By following state standard of valuing goodwill in divorce, appraisers built a solid record of medical practice valuation, confirmed on appeal.
• O'Donnell-States v. States
  Trial court did not err in valuing dental practice at an amount less than the husband's prior buy-in value; and did not improperly include personal goodwill value when neither expert included its value ...
• Olsen v. Olsen
  125 Idaho 603, 873 P.2d 857 (Idaho Apr. 4, 1994). Judge Johnson.
• Palmerino v. Palmerino
  Massachusetts court precludes discounts in valuing marital business in divorce, and says that while income approach is preferred, net asset value may be appropriate in the absence of determinable market value.
• Pappas v. Pappas
  In valuing husband’s partnership interest in rental-storage business, trial court could consider income capitalization or cost approach and adopt valuation that included non-controlling (minority) interest discount of 33% based on real estate appraiser’s ...
• Patel v. Patel
  The appellate court finds that, performing the requisite intrinsic value review, the circuit court properly declined to include in its analysis any discounts the husband’s expert proposed to account for his fractional interest in companies owning hotels ...
• Pearlstein v. Pearlstein
  Trial court finds medical practice valuation that includes goodwill more persuasive, when the firm had been in business more than 50 years and had three locations.
• Pelanda v. Pelanda
  The issue in this case was whether the trial court erred in valuing the parties' law practice, Liggett-Pelanda, LPA, by not awarding accounts receivable and goodwill.
• Pellom v. Pellom
  Challenge to medical practice valuation focuses on physician productivity, goodwill, benchmark data, and normalized earnings adjustment.
• Peltzer v. Peltzer
  Appellate court rules doctor husband who knew his expert was the only appraiser of his practice cannot blame trial court for relying on expert’s unclear discount in valuation.
• Petersen v. Petersen
  One issue before the court in this marital dissolution was the value of the husband’s 40% interest in the family-owned printing company Petersen Printing Corporation (PPC).
• Pickard v. Pickard
  Minor errors in appraiser’s testimony weren’t fatal—but application of an “arbitrary” minority discount to real estate holding company was.
• Poore v. Poore
  The issue was how a solely-owned professional association should be valued for purposes of equitable distribution.
• Popham v. Popham
  The appeals court in this marital dissolution case held that the trial court did not err by allowing wife's financial expert to refer to certain securities when testifying about the methodology he used to place a fair market value on husband's business.
• Potter v. Potter
  At issue is the valuation of husband's medical practice.
• Prevost v. Prevost
  Expert’s “market valuation assessment” to estimate sale price of husband’s two businesses satisfies principles for valuation of closely held company, says appeals court; case law looks to IRS Revenue Ruling 59-60, but disfavors use of book value.
• Professional corporation can derive income from outside consultants
  In this marital dissolution case, the husband appealed only the trial court's valuation of his closely held corporation, Petroleum Resources Management Corporation (PRMC). Trial court ...
• Quillen v. Quillen (I)
  At issue is the division of the marital property and the valuation of the couple's construction business.
• Quillen v. Quillen (II)
  At issue is the valuation of couple's construction business.
• R.V.K. v. L.L.K.
  One of the primary issues in this marital dissolution was the value of the parties' stock in a medical practice group and related medical equipment business.
• Rabe v. Rabe (I)
  Divorce court discredits expert valuation for failure to independently verify information provided by the owner/husband.
• Rabe v. Rabe (II)
  Appeals court affirms trial court’s valuation, which implicitly assigned goodwill to business, finding that since the company was not a professional practice it is likely that the company’s, rather than the owner spouse’s, reputation brings in business.
• Reedy-Huffman v. Huffman
  State high court affirms trial court’s determination that husband’s naturopathic practice had zero goodwill value based solely on husband’s testimony that a similar practice in the area failed to attract a buyer despite being on the market for a year.
• Rhinehart v. Rhinehart
  The issue in this marital dissolution was the value of husband’s interest in a law firm.
• Rhodes v. Rhodes
  Miss. appellate court confirms “bright line” rule that all goodwill, whether enterprise or personal, of a professional or retail firm, is excluded from the valuation of a business in divorce.
• Richard L. Cohen v. Doris I. Cohen
  The New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department affirmed the lower court’s decision not to apply a lack of marketability discount to the value of a real property holding company. Relying on established case law, the court noted that a la ...
• Richards v. Knuchel
  In determining whether a legal malpractice claim involving a marital dissolution action would have succeeded on appeal, the district court had ruled that the trial court's valuation of husband's business was not erroneous, and husband appealed.
• Richmond v. Richmond
  At issue is the value of husband's law firm, alimony, child support, and attorney fees.
• Rochelle Grunfeld v. Harold M. Grunfeld
  The New York Court of Appeals determined that the value of a law license which is included in the marital community may be considered as income available for alimony payments or as property available for distribution. It noted that the income stream gene ...
• Rolfe v. Rolfe
• Ronnie Gay Cornett v. Kathleen Kay Cornett
  The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the valuation of an interest in a mining company. The issue turned on the correct amount of the company’s Multi-Employer Pension Plan Amendment Act of 1980 potential liability. The court utilized 15% of gross ...
• Root v. Root
  The issue in this marital dissolution was the valuation of the wife's interest in Big Horn Basin Pathology, Inc.
• Rozenman v. Rozenman
  Divorce court did not err by using asset value to value husband’s separate business at the start of the marriage, and market value to measure the business at the end; the court was also correct in adopting an industry rate of return rather than an implied ...
• Russell v. Russell
  Court of Appeals rejects husband’s claim that trial court erred in valuing interest in family business based on wife’s expert’s computation, which deviated from industry standards and included discounts (DLOM, DLOC, personal goodwill) based on expert’s ag ...
• Salumbides v. Salumbides
  Divorce court values medical practice based solely on accounts receivable, largely due to lack of evidence and cooperation from owner-spouse.
• Sampson v. Sampson
  The issues in this marital dissolution were the valuation of wife’s insurance agency and the “double-dipping” that wife claimed was a result of the improper division of the property.
• Sanders v. Sanders
  Husband's expert's valuation upheld because of competent method (excess earnings & sales price to cash flow), detailed testimony and experience.
• Scharfman v. Scharfman
  In this marital dissolution case, the issue was the appropriate valuation date for the parties' 85 operating entities, which, in turn, owned more than 100 residential rental real estate properties.
• Schickner v. Schickner
  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.
• Schiro v. Schiro
  Determination of reasonable compensation in valuation of private practice (dental) in dissolution case ...
• Schneider v. Schneider
  The issue in this marital dissolution was the value of husband’s dental practice and whether personal goodwill and accounts receivable should be included in that value.
• Schorer v. Schorer
  177 Wis. 2d 387, 501 N.W.2d 916 (Wis. Ct. App. May 27, 1993). Judge Eich.
• Schumann v. Schumann
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution case was whether the trial court had properly stricken the testimony of wife’s valuation expert.
• Scott v. Scott
  Court values accounting practice as a partnership, when it is a corporation "in name only."
• Seiler v. Seiler
  Issue is whether speculative tax consequences are an element of valuing an ongoing business, in this case an accounting practice.
• Settele v. Settele
  Appeals court rejects claim that accounts receivable used in asset-based business valuation by wife’s expert are analogous to future income stream for purposes of arguing double dip in light of income determination for spousal support award.
• Sharp v. Sharp
  In using the capitalization of earnings method to value husband’s medical practice, the wife’s expert did not improperly include personal goodwill, the appellate court finds; the valuation rested on actual earnings with some adjustment for reasonable comp ...
• Sherry Wingate v. Jeffrey D. Wingate
  The Ohio Court of Appeals, Sixth District affirmed the valuation of a one-third interest in an insurance company. The lower court applied a lack of marketability discount but declined to apply a minority discount. In affirming the denial of the minority ...
• Shewbart v. Shewbart (I)
  Trial court (divorce) commits reversible error by valuing only the hard assets of a restaurant and ignoring evidence of its substantial annual income and consistent profits.
• Shewbart v. Shewbart (II)
  Court finds that 2x EBITDA multiple is not too low for restaurant valuation, due to 2008 economic downturn and long hours by husband, a solo proprietor.
• Short v. Short
  Appraisal used in estate tax valuation, which included substantial discounts for lack of marketability and control, were inappropriate for use 10 years later in divorce.
• Shuck v. Shuck
  Nebraska appellate court precludes discounts for embedded capital gains tax under the asset approach, confirms tax “adjustments” to the cash flows of a business under the income approach, and affirms that applications of minority and marketability discoun ...
• Sides v. Sides
  At issue is the valuation of husband's auto part business and wife's floral business.
• Sieber v. Sieber
  Court affirms valuation of husband’s minority interest in business featuring zero DLOC where husband was key driving force behind business’s success and wielded influence and control; use of asset approach rendered double-dip theory inapplicable.
• Silver v. Silver
  Court credits buy-sell in valuation of consulting business.
• Singley v. Singley (I)
  The husband in this marital dissolution matter appealed the trial court's valuation of his dental practice, which included a goodwill component.
• Singley v. Singley (II)
  Among the issues in this case of first impression was whether goodwill should be included in the fair market value of a sole proprietorship for purposes of equitable distribution.
• Skokos v. Skokos
  At issue is the valuation of the marital property and the admittance of expert testimony.
• Skrabak v. Skrabak
  At issue is the valution of husband's medical practice.
• Slater v. Slater
  Oregon court adopts majority rule, finding it improper to predicate the value of a professional practice on a noncompete.
• Smith v. Smith
  Issues are whether husband's law practice was a marital asset and whether the value of the practice should include goodwill.
• Smith v. Smith
  Good reminder for appraisers (and attorneys) to make sure distinction between profession/personal and enterprise goodwill makes it into the court record.
• Soileau v. Soileau
  Goodwill can not be included for a professional corporation, husband's expert included no goodwill value, burden of proof was on wife to contest, but did not do so at trial. Ruling affirmed.
• Sommer v. Sommer
  176 A.D.2d 1022, 575 N.Y.S.2d 178 (N.Y. App. Div. Oct. 17, 1991). Judge Yesawich.
• Sorensen v. Sorensen
  Issues were valuation and distribution of husband's dental practice and allocation of expert witness fees.
• Spady v. Spady
  Appellate court holds that valuation date must bear a “rational relationship” to the assets being valued, and confirms no value for the auto dealership in this case, based on standard appraisal practice to round negative values to zero.
• Sparks v. Sparks
  Appellate court upholds dated valuation husband’s expert performed of veterinary hospital two years prior to trial, where it informed proposed sale of minority interest in business to willing buyer and asset was not volatile; there is no “artificial cut-o ...
• Stageberg v. Stageberg
  In this marital dissolution case, the trial court determined that husband's right to contingency fees from his legal practice, obtained before the valuation date, were marital assets.
• Starling v. Starling
  In divorce case, appellate court upholds classification of a family business as hybrid property, entitling the community to the increase in value that came about during the marriage; and, it validates the trial court’s decision to rest its valuation on th ...
• Statham v. Statham
  State statute provides guidance on whether goodwill value is treated as marital property; court questions expert's thoroughness.
• Steneken v. Steneken (I)
  The issue in this marital dissolution was the perceived “double counting” of the husband’s excess earnings from his closely held corporation, Esco.
• Steneken v. Steneken (II)
  The question was whether it is impermissible "double counting" to use actual income for alimony purposes but a lower "normalized" income amount when valuing a closely held business for equitable distribution purposes.
• Sternat v. Sternat
  Appeals court says trial court’s decision to admit opinion of seasoned CPA expert who was not a credentialed business valuator was not error because valuation was a “non-issue” where evidence showed the indebted company was no longer a going concern.
• Stevens v. Stevens
  1993 Neb. App. LEXIS 219 (Neb. Ct. App. Apr. 20, 1993). Judge Wright.
• Stewart v. Stewart
  Idaho declines to make the distinction between enterprise and personal goodwill in valuing a professional practice in divorce, holding all goodwill is marital property.
• Stribling v. Stribling
  In this marital dissolution case, husband had owned a modular buildings business, which he later transferred to wife, who renamed it Elite Modular Structures.
• Swaney v. Swaney
  North Carolina Court of Appeals affirms $30,000 goodwill value for closely held IT firm based on a multiple of earnings approach and assumption of a non-compete in a willing buyer/willing seller transaction.
• Sweere v. Gilbert-Sweere
  At issue is whether the district court erred in finding that the gross proceeds from the sale of the parties' marital stock in a closely-held corporation did not include $200,000 designated as payment for a noncompetition agreement.
• Taaid v. Taaid
  In this marital dissolution case, the primary valuation issue was how much husband's medical practice had increased in value.
• Taylor v. Taylor
  One issue in this case was the valuation of a medical laboratory.
• Taylor v. Taylor
  North Carolina court of appeals affirms application of discount for lack of marketability to value of marital business (hospital pharmacy), as substantiated by the evidence.
• Thompson v. Thompson
  At issue is whether or not professional goodwill should be considered marital property.
• Traczyk v. Traczyk
  One issue in this case was the method for valuing goodwill in a medical practice.
• Travis v. Travis
  One of the issues in this case was whether the trial court erred in classifying Larry's Auto Repair business as marital property.
• Triperinas v. Triperinas
  At issue is the valuation of the marital property, including wife's interest in a family owned car dealership.
• Troutman v. Troutman
  One issue in this case was the value of husband's electrical company.
• Utter v. Utter
  At issue is the valuation of husband's welding and repair shop.
• Vanzant v. Vanzant
  Appellate court reverses trial court’s valuation of the parties’ liquor business, finding that it apparently “split the difference” between the parties’ valuations without sufficient evidence in the record to support this median value.
• Verholek v. Verholek
  At issue is the valuation of husband's 310 shares of Caltron, Inc. and wife's expert's testimony about this valuation.
• Von Hohn v. Von Hohn
  Court considers difference between professional/commercial goodwill in valuing plaintiff’s litigation law firm with large, contingency fee work.
• Walker v. Walker
  Walker v. Walker ...
• Walker v. Walker
  The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s characterization and valuation of the husband’s interest in a family agribusiness corporation. The court determined that this situation warranted a Grace award (an award of cash when family agribusi ...
• Walsh v. Walsh
  Buy-sell agreement did not limit husband’s interest in national law firm to $140,000 or the “realizable benefits” of the practice; valuation should have included assessment of goodwill, appellate court rules.
• Ward v. Ward
  One issue in this case was the valuation of a medical practice.
• Ward v. Ward
  High court rejects valuation of husband’s interest in closely held company where wife’s expert transformed it from one owned by four people into one managed by one person to increase its overall value.
• Washington v. Washington
  In this marital dissolution, there were two main issues: the correct valuation date of husband's interest in Washford Enterprises, a group home, and whether wife's expert, William Dacey, correctly applied the income approach.
• Watson v. Watson
  The issue in this case was the value of goodwill in husband's vet practice.
• Wechsler v. Wechsler
  NY appellate court approves dollar-for-dollar discount for embedded taxes in valuation of securities holding company in divorce.
• Weinberg v. Dickson-Weinberg
  Hawai’i court confirms majority rule regarding disposition of professional/enterprise goodwill and joins majority rule regarding valuation of contingency fee cases, with some adjustment.
• Weinstein v. Weinstein (II)
  Does an analyst’s due diligence extend to a duty to uncover fraud?
• Wicheta v. Wicheta
  At issue is the valuation of the goodwill of husband's medical practice.
• Wichman v. Wichman
  At issue is the valuation of husband's brokerage business.
• WIlliam H. Davis v. Daira F. Davis
  The Tennessee Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s valuation of the husband’s interest in a snap-out business forms company. The husband’s stock was subject to a buy-sell agreement. On appeal, he argued that the valuation accepted by the lower cour ...
• Williams v. Williams
  At issue is whether the trial court erred in assigning a value for goodwill to the husband's accounting practice.
• Williams v. Williams
  The issue in this marital dissolution was the fair market value of husbands medical clinic and surgery center. Goodwill was the major point of disagreement between the experts.
• Wilson v. Wilson
  West Virginia Supreme Court finds that construction management fees, conditioned on completion of a project, are analogous to attorney contingency fee contracts and subject to same rules of equitable division.
• Wisner v. Wisner
  At issue is the value of child support and maintenance, and husband's stock in his medical practice.
• Wold v. Wold
  Court citing goodwill and network of contacts to owner prefers asset approach to valuation of oilfield business.
• Wood v. Wood
  Appellate court rejects calculation of value of closely held business under buy-sell agreement that did use proper valuation date or standard of value (FMV).
• Wright v. Wright
  Wife raised issues concerning the court's valuation of a veterinary clinic, including goodwill.
• Wright v. Wright
  Court considers the applicability of discounts to a minority shareholder’s interest in an S corp, and whether the company’s retained earnings may be properly attributable to a minority owner for child support determinations.
• Wright v. Wright
  Trial court correctly applies 20% "attrition discount" to value of husband's accounting firm when there was credible, non-speculative evidence that the firm would lose customers in the future due to natural attrition.
• Wright v. Wright
  Court of Appeals affirms use of excess earnings method to calculate business goodwill in husband’s law firm interest; no controlling authority exists to mandate that trial court limit its use to cases in which pertinent financial data is unavailable, cour ...
• Wynn v. Wynn
  The issue in this case was the value of the husband's heating company.
• Yoon v. Yoon
  At issue is the goodwill value of husband's medical practice.
• Yoon v. Yoon
  At issue is the valuation of husband's medical practice and the admittance of expert testimony.
• York v. York
  Issue was the valuation of husband's 85% interest in a medical practice corporation, including whether goodwill component of value should be considered.
• Young v. Young
  One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the value of husband's sole proprietorship interest in Sun Shak Tans, a tanning salon.
• Zasler v. Zasler
  Appeals court affirmed the valuation of wife's expert. His valuation used capitalization of historical income (husband took no salary at the time) and commercial goodwill (he felt husband's personal goodwill shouldn't be taken into account).
• Zerbe v. Zerbe
  The issue in this marital dissolution was the value of husband’s medical practice.
• Zoldan v. Zoldan
  At issue is the credibility of the expert witnesses as to the value of husband's accounting business.
• Zwerk v. Zwerk
  In this marital dissolution action, the court ruled that discounts given to family members that had no relation to marketability should be ignored when valuing corporate entities, and that the tax effects on a partnership interest should also be ignored.