Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Connecticut Supreme Court clarifies double-counting rule

In a recent decision, the Connecticut Supreme Court clarified this jurisdiction approach to double counting (or double dipping).

Letter to the Editor: Comments on Using Jensen’s Alpha for Active and Passive Appreciation

This is a Letter to the Editor from Ashok B. Abbott, Ph.D. (West Virginia University), in response to a prior article on segregating passive from active increases in the value of an asset in the context of marital dissolution.

Letter to the Editor: Response to Dr. Abbott’s Comments on Using Jensen’s Alpha for Separating Active and Passive Appreciation

This is a Letter to the Editor from Mark Filler that responds to comments from Dr. Ashok Abbott about Mr. Filler’s prior article on the use of Jensen’s alpha. Dr. Abbott’s comments can be found elsewhere in this issue.

Oudheusden v. Oudheusden (II)

In this divorce case, the Connecticut Supreme Court, overturning the appellate court, clarifies that awarding the nonowner spouse part of the value of the owner spouse’s businesses and basing alimony on income generated from the businesses is not impermissible double counting (double dipping).

Connecticut Supreme Court Clarifies Double Counting Rule in Divorce Cases Involving Valuation of a Business and Determination of Alimony

In this divorce case, the Connecticut Supreme Court, overturning the appellate court, clarifies that awarding the nonowner spouse part of the value of the owner spouse’s businesses and basing alimony on income generated from the businesses is not impermissible double counting (double dipping).

Goodwill: A Discussion and a Debate

Two of the most knowledgeable experts in the area of goodwill and personal goodwill, Alan Zipp and Jim Alerding, will cover the key issues and controversies that you want to know about. They will discuss and debate frequently asked questions on the topic, and while sometimes they will agree and sometimes they will disagree, in all cases they will attempt to inform and educate the attendees on the topic.

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.

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.

Appreciation in Liquor Company’s Value Represents Marital Property, Appeals Court Finds

Appeals court upholds ruling that appreciation in value of husband’s interest in family liquor business is marital asset; trial court carefully analyzed husband’s role in company to find he “substantially contributed” to the increase and husband stipulated to wife’s substantial contribution.

Court Explains Treatment of Undistributed Earnings in Valuing Law Firm Partnership Interest

In valuing husband’s law firm partnership interest, court finds undistributed earnings, even though allocated to husband before separation, are not marital property because money was based on firm’s anticipated net profits; money was not earned during marriage but after parties’ separation.

Burchfield v. Burchfield

In valuing husband’s law firm partnership interest, court finds undistributed earnings, even though allocated to husband before separation, are not marital property because money was based on firm’s anticipated net profits; money was not earned during marriage but after parties’ separation.

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.

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.

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.

Lucchesi v. Lucchesi

Appeals court upholds ruling that appreciation in value of husband’s interest in family liquor business is marital asset; trial court carefully analyzed husband’s role in company to find he “substantially contributed” to the increase and husband stipulated to wife’s substantial contribution.

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.

Court Looks to Owner’s ‘Proportionate’ Share in Business to Quantify Appreciation in Value

In quantifying marital portion of appreciation of owner spouse’s separate property, trial court relies on owner’s “proportionate” share in company but also considers expert testimony as to third parties’ efforts and owner’s role in generating revenue; court rejects passive factor analysis.

Herbert v. Joubert

In quantifying marital portion of appreciation of owner spouse’s separate property, trial court relies on owner’s “proportionate” share in company but also considers expert testimony as to third parties’ efforts and owner’s role in generating revenue; court rejects passive factor analysis.

Can a nonprofessional business have personal goodwill? Arkansas court explains

Arkansas is one of the many states that differentiate between enterprise goodwill and personal goodwill. The former is marital property and divisible at divorce; the latter is not. A question that has come up in recent years is whether the owner of a nonprofessional business can claim personal goodwill whose value is excludable from the marital estate.

Using Jensen’s Alpha to Separate Active and Passive Appreciation

The author presents an alternate approach (Jensen’s alpha) to segregating passive from active increases in the value of a marital asset. An example is presented of an automobile dealer.

1 - 25 of 66 results