Nonowner spouse obtains discovery of valuation-related info from owner spouse’s medical practice
A Florida divorce case prompted an important discovery ruling from the appellate court as to a nonowner spouse’s right to access documents and information regarding the owner spouse’s interest in a large medical practice.
In Florida divorce, expert’s ‘with-and-without’ valuation withstands appeal
In a nasty Florida divorce case, an appellate court recently upheld the trial court’s valuation findings concerning the husband’s 50% interest in a successful company that operates in the waste disposal industry.
Coverture Fraction Method Best BV Approach in Face of Lack of Financial Data
In divorce case, appellate court affirms use of coverture fraction method to determine marital value of husband’s firm on the valuation date (1995), where company operated abroad, “normal” financial documents were not available, and interest was sold a decade before the divorce trial.
Kvinta v. Kvinta
In divorce case, appellate court affirms use of coverture fraction method to determine marital value of husband’s firm on the valuation date (1995), where company operated abroad, “normal” financial documents were not available, and interest was sold a decade before the divorce trial.
Hall v. Hall
In discovery dispute, appeals court says trial court’s protective order in favor of medical practice is too broad; nonowner spouse may obtain information shedding light on value of owner spouse’s ownership interest; operating agreement requiring use of book value may not be controlling here.
Medical Practice Must Produce Information Bearing on Spouse’s Ownership Value
In discovery dispute, appeals court says trial court’s protective order in favor of medical practice is too broad; nonowner spouse may obtain information shedding light on value of owner spouse’s ownership interest; operating agreement requiring use of book value may not be controlling here.
Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (I)
Appellate court remands because of trial court’s impermissible double dipping, where trial court awarded wife half of the fair market value of husband’s two solely owned businesses, which represented husband’s sole income stream, and based spousal support on annual income generated by businesses.
Connecticut Appellate Court Remands Because of Impermissible Double Dipping
Appellate court remands because of trial court’s impermissible double dipping, where trial court awarded wife half of the fair market value of husband’s two solely owned businesses, which represented husband’s sole income stream, and based spousal support on annual income generated by businesses.
Fox v. Fox
Appellate court affirms that increase in value of husband’s company is subject to equitable distribution but says trial court erred when it assumed company had zero value on the date of marriage because company then was not profitable; court remands for determination of company’s premarital value.
Court Remands for Determination of Separate Asset’s Premarital Value
Appellate court affirms that increase in value of husband’s company is subject to equitable distribution but says trial court erred when it assumed company had zero value on the date of marriage because company then was not profitable; court remands for determination of company’s premarital value.
Stephanos v. Stephanos (In re Marriage of Stephanos)
Trial court adopts goodwill value determination of wife’s expert (residual method) as well as expert’s finding that none of goodwill in family business is personal to owner spouse; business’s success was not dependent on owner’s continued presence or his execution of a noncompete, court says.
Divorce Court Finds No Personal Goodwill Value in Single-Owner Business
Trial court adopts goodwill value determination of wife’s expert (residual method) as well as expert’s finding that none of goodwill in family business is personal to owner spouse; business’s success was not dependent on owner’s continued presence or his execution of a noncompete, court says.
Split high court rules on classification of earnout payment in divorce dispute
The parties’ dispute over how to classify earnout payments related to the sale of a valuable marital asset recently prompted a split ruling from the Minnesota Supreme Court. The issue was whether those payments were part of the sales consideration, as the wife argued, or represented future compensation to the husband, as the district court found.
Contentious ruling from Minnesota high court on dealing with earnout payments in divorce
In an important ruling, a divided Minnesota Supreme Court recently ruled on whether earnout payments related to the sale of the husband’s interest in a lucrative company were a marital asset.
Persaud v. Goad
Court affirms divorce valuations for mixed real estate and business assets; even if trial court erred in stating negative value for business that generated no income but carried high annual costs, the error was harmless where court reframed decision as one of fairness rather than finances.
Mix of Real Estate and Business Assets Poses Valuation Challenges for Courts
Court affirms divorce valuations for mixed real estate and business assets; even if trial court erred in stating negative value for business that generated no income but carried high annual costs, the error was harmless where court reframed decision as one of fairness rather than finances.
Divided High Court Says Earn-Out Payments From Company Sale Are a Marital Asset
Earn-out payments related to sale of a marital asset were marital asset and subject to equitable distribution, Supreme Court’s majority says, even though value of the payments was uncertain as of the valuation date and the sale of the husband’s company took place after the valuation date.
Gill v. Gill
Earn-out payments related to sale of a marital asset were marital asset and subject to equitable distribution, Supreme Court’s majority says, even though value of the payments was uncertain as of the valuation date and the sale of the husband’s company took place after the valuation date.
Tenn. Appeals Court says DLOM in divorce appropriate under facts of case
A recent Tennessee appeals court decision found that the trial court presiding over a drawn-out divorce had discretion to apply a marketability discount when it valued the owner-spouse’s interest in two companies in 2016.
Tennessee appeals court allows slight DLOM in divorce case
Valuators working on divorce cases in Tennessee know that the jurisprudence on the use of the marketability discount has been nebulous.
Ohio Appeals Court Approves Use of Fair Value Standard in Valuing Farm Entities
Appeals court upholds valuation of minority interest in farm entities based on fair value standard of value; court notes prevailing expert specifically referenced buy-sell agreements that did not contemplate use of discounts in valuing exiting member’s partial interest.
Tate v. Tate
Appeals court upholds valuation of minority interest in farm entities based on fair value standard of value; court notes prevailing expert specifically referenced buy-sell agreements that did not contemplate use of discounts in valuing exiting member’s partial interest.
Telfer v. Telfer
In context of determining appreciation in value, appeals court says trial court did not err when it applied DLOM in valuing partial interests in businesses representing wife’s separate property; DLOM use is within trial court’s discretion and depends on facts of the case.
Tennessee Appeals Court Defers to Trial Court on DLOM Use in Divorce
In context of determining appreciation in value, appeals court says trial court did not err when it applied DLOM in valuing partial interests in businesses representing wife’s separate property; DLOM use is within trial court’s discretion and depends on facts of the case.
Montana Supreme Court Remands for Failure to Assess Tax Implications
High court says trial court erred when it failed to consider tax implications where its final order appears to make sale of family ranch a necessity; evidence suggests there are no other assets with which to buy wife’s shares of ranch corporation at FMV.