Loiselle v. Loiselle
In this Arizona divorce case, the mother appealed the trial court’s decision as to the value of the business. The father’s expert’s testimony was found more credible than that of the mother’s expert. Additionally, the trial court was affirmed on its decision to exclude the mother’s expert’s attendance in the courtroom for the testimony of the father’s expert. Separation of witnesses is a frequently used tool in litigation, but it is not often an appeal issue. Both courts presented clear rationale for the exclusion of the mother’s expert from the courtroom.
Arizona Appellate Court Affirms Business Value and Separation of Witness
In this Arizona divorce case, the mother appealed the trial court’s decision as to the value of the business. The father’s expert’s testimony was found more credible than that of the mother’s expert. Additionally, the trial court was affirmed on its decision to exclude the mother’s expert’s attendance in the courtroom for the testimony of the father’s expert. Separation of witnesses is a frequently used tool in litigation, but it is not often an appeal issue. Both courts presented clear rationale for the exclusion of the mother’s expert from the courtroom.
Lunt v. Lunt
This divorce case provided a good analysis of personal versus enterprise goodwill and the elements that were included in each. It also discussed the history of personal and enterprise goodwill in Utah that progressively allowed the exclusion of personal goodwill from the marital estate in a divorce in Utah. The general principles of personal versus enterprise goodwill are applicable most everywhere.
Utah Appeals Court Affirms Trial Court Allocation of 5% of Value of Husband’s Website Business to Personal Goodwill
This divorce case provided a good analysis of personal versus enterprise goodwill and the elements that were included in each. It also discussed the history of personal and enterprise goodwill in Utah that progressively allowed the exclusion of personal goodwill from the marital estate in a divorce in Utah. The general principles of personal versus enterprise goodwill are applicable most everywhere.
No DLOC on a 50% interest, says appellate court
In a divorce matter in Indiana, the husband and wife each owned a 50% interest in a crop-dusting business.
Townsend v. Townsend
This was yet another case that emphasized the importance of the valuation expert’s responsibility to identify the amount of personal versus enterprise goodwill in a specific case.
Indiana Appellate Court Affirms the Value of Husband’s Business That Excludes Personal Goodwill but Adds Back DLOC as Parties’ Interests Must be Combined
This was yet another case that emphasized the importance of the valuation expert’s responsibility to identify the amount of personal versus enterprise goodwill in a specific case.
Stay-at-home spouse gets 20% of value increase in husband’s separate business
In New York, the appreciation in value of a business started before marriage may be treated as marital property, but not all the appreciation is included. The courts use an active/passive test that carves out the passive appreciation (e.g., from market forces), so only the active appreciation of the business owner spouse would be subject to distribution to the nonowner spouse. But, in a recent divorce case, it appears that this analysis was not done, and the nonowner spouse got a share of the total appreciation of the business.
Rigas v. Rigas
In this appeal of a New York divorce case, the appellate court affirmed the award of 20% of the during-marriage appreciation of the husband’s business to the wife. The court accepted the valuation of the court-appointed appraiser and rejected the valuation by the defendant’s appraiser.
New York Appellate Court Affirms Award of 20% of Appreciation of Business During Marriage to Wife and Awards Maintenance to Wife
In this appeal of a New York divorce case, the appellate court affirmed the award of 20% of the during-marriage appreciation of the husband’s business to the wife. The court accepted the valuation of the court-appointed appraiser and rejected the valuation by the defendant’s appraiser.
Sneed v. Sneed
In this North Carolina appellate divorce case, the court affirmed the trial court decisions, including the determination of value of the husband’s law firm interest. The witness for the wife, who was originally a court-appointed expert, testified as to the value of the law practice and included his analysis of personal-versus-entity goodwill. Both courts included all goodwill in the marital estate as per North Carolina case law. The expert witness apparently submitted a calculation of value for his testimony.
North Carolina Court of Appeals Affirms Trial Court as to Inclusion of Personal Goodwill
In this North Carolina appellate divorce case, the court affirmed the trial court decisions, including the determination of value of the husband’s law firm interest. The witness for the wife, who was originally a court-appointed expert, testified as to the value of the law practice and included his analysis of personal-versus-entity goodwill. Both courts included all goodwill in the marital estate as per North Carolina case law. The expert witness apparently submitted a calculation of value for his testimony.
Bergquist v. Bergquist
The appellate court (Indiana) found that the circuit court abused its discretion when valuing the wife’s business by not determining a value based on there being no evidence that would support such a value. The appellate court remanded the issue of the value of the business for determination based on evidence that would support it.
Indiana Appellate Court Remands to Revalue Wife’s Business Supported by the Evidence
The appellate court (Indiana) found that the circuit court abused its discretion when valuing the wife’s business by not determining a value based on there being no evidence that would support such a value. The appellate court remanded the issue of the value of the business for determination based on evidence that would support it.
Lymburner v. Axhelm
In a divorce case in Alaska, the Supreme Court determined that the wife’s expert’s valuation was superior to the husband’s expert’s valuation. Thus, the value of the business was not at issue on a remand. What was at issue was whether some or all of the businesses were separate property rather than marital property as the lower court ruled.
Alaska Supreme Court Remands for Determination of Marital Property But Affirms Lower Court’s Acceptance of Wife’s Business Value
In a divorce case in Alaska, the Supreme Court determined that the wife’s expert’s valuation was superior to the husband’s expert’s valuation. Thus, the value of the business was not at issue on a remand. What was at issue was whether some or all of the businesses were separate property rather than marital property as the lower court ruled.
In re Marriage of Sommerville
This Iowa divorce case dealt with an appeal by the wife of the determined earnings of the husband and awards of child support and spousal maintenance. She also contended that the husband dissipated marital assets by failing to pay taxes and incurring penalties and interest. The appellate court determined that the trial court erred in determining the husband’s income and thus remanded for redetermination of child support and spousal support awards. The appellate court also affirmed the determination that the husband did not dissipate marital assets and affirmed the property division. Issues of evidence to determine income or earnings were also discussed.
Appellate Court Remands for New Determination of Husband’s Earnings, Affirms No Dissipation of Assets
This Iowa divorce case dealt with an appeal by the wife of the determined earnings of the husband and awards of child support and spousal maintenance. She also contended that the husband dissipated marital assets by failing to pay taxes and incurring penalties and interest. The appellate court determined that the trial court erred in determining the husband’s income and thus remanded for redetermination of child support and spousal support awards. The appellate court also affirmed the determination that the husband did not dissipate marital assets and affirmed the property division. Issues of evidence to determine income or earnings were also discussed.
Lieberman-Massoni v. Massoni
The trial court in this New York divorce awarded the value of the husband’s class B units in lieu of awarding a portion of the actual units to the wife and also barred the wife from any distributions on those units occurring after the valuation date.
New York Appellate Court Affirms Award of Value of Husband’s Class B Units in Lieu of Actual Distribution of Share of Units
The trial court in this New York divorce awarded the value of the husband’s class B units in lieu of awarding a portion of the actual units to the wife and also barred the wife from any distributions on those units occurring after the valuation date.
Maher v. Cmejrek
The wife appealed the trial court’s decisions as to the values of the husband’s interests in his various medical practices and clinics and challenged the trial court’s determination of the husband’s income for support purposes. The appellate court affirmed the values of the medical practices and clinics and remanded the determination of income for support purposes for recalculation.
Indiana Appellate Court Affirms Valuation of Medical Practice Interests of Husband but Remands for Recalculation of Husband’s Income for Child Support
The wife appealed the trial court’s decisions as to the values of the husband’s interests in his various medical practices and clinics and challenged the trial court’s determination of the husband’s income for support purposes. The appellate court affirmed the values of the medical practices and clinics and remanded the determination of income for support purposes for recalculation.
Mikalacki v. Rubezic
In this Arizona marital dissolution case, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s acceptance of a calculation of value to determine the value of a couple’s law practice, awarded to the husband as part of the equitable distribution. Other matters not related to valuation issues were part of the appellate decision.
Arizona Appeals Court Affirms Trial Court’s Acceptance of a Calculation of Value
In this Arizona marital dissolution case, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s acceptance of a calculation of value to determine the value of a couple’s law practice, awarded to the husband as part of the equitable distribution. Other matters not related to valuation issues were part of the appellate decision.
Hollis v. Hollis
One of the main issues in this appeal was how to classify the husband’s “book of business,” i.e., his client relationships, assets under management, and related income. The husband was a financial advisor for UBS. The wife contended the book of business had value that constituted a marital asset. The husband pointed out that UBS now took the position that a financial advisor who left the company cannot take any information with him or her. The court also noted that “deferred cash agreements” were actually bonuses that were marital assets. The appellate court affirmed the trial court’s decision to exclude the book of business from marital assets. The court also affirmed the trial court decision on payment of alimony to the wife “in futuro.”