Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Husband’s version of the facts not supported by the record

Husband and wife were married in 1979, and wife filed for divorce in 2000.

Minnesota Supreme Court affirms that passive appreciation in nonmarital property is nonmarital

Earnings retained in wife’s AAA were not income because they might never be distributed, nor were the earnings active appreciation.

Preseparation valuation date upheld

The court of appeals held that the trial court’s use of the pre-separation valuation date for husband's neurology practice was not an abuse of discretion.

Single customer relationship results in zero value

Trial court did not err in adopting zero valuation where appraiser considered nature of trucking company and that its revenue was from a single customer.

Arneson v. Arneson

Wife's expert's opinion held up as more credible, in part because the valuation date was the date both parties had agreed to, whereas husband's expert had not.

Alley v. Alley

At issue is the valuation of debt owned by the marital business (trial court did not value this) as well as classification of other debts as marital.

Anzalone v. Anzalone

On appeal, the court found that the trial court erred in discounting the wife's stock awarded to husband for capital gains.

Parties failed to distinguish personal and practice goodwill

Wife’s expert, Richard Schwartz, testified that the fair market values of ADC and Gastro were $911,200 and $1,477,000, respectively,Husband was a gastroenterologist who owned a clinic ...

Failure to prove active appreciation in value of stock results in remand

The issue in this case was the characterization of husband’s interest in a mining company. The parties were married in 1968.

Experts comparable rent analysis the deciding factor

The issue on appeal was the value of the parties’ two businesses. The parties met in 1983 and married in 1991.

Case Remanded to Trial Court for Failure to Value the Business

The issue in this marital dissolution was whether the trial court erred in failing to value the company and instead splitting the husband’s stock between the parties.

Consideration of Post-Dissolution Events Improper

The issue in this post-dissolution matter was whether the court erred in re-evaluating the original valuation of the husband’s business.

Valuation Within Range of Expert Testimony Upheld

Husband received Scheppelmann Electric as a gift from his father about two years after the parties were married.

No Distinction Between Types of Goodwill

n the December 2002 issue of the BVU we abstracted the Mississippi Supreme Court opinion in this case.

Bungard v. Bungard

On appeal the wife argues that the trial court should not have deducted certain expenses from her expert's valuation of husband's veterinary practice. At issue also is the date of valuation ...

Boyd v. Boyd

Issue is whether the trial court erred in valuing the husband's business, and including an amount for goodwill in the value.

Opinion of Goodwill for practice of Dr. Fredirick I. Field

This document is in .pdf and requires Adobe Acrobat for viewing. Click here to download Adobe Acrobat.

Declaration of Carol Jean Thompson in Support of Petitioner's Motion for Reconsideration

This document is in .pdf and requires Adobe Acrobat for viewing. Click here to download Adobe Acrobat.

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.

Guthmiller v. Guthmiller

Issue is the failure of the trial court to determine a value of the husband's insurance business where neither party presented expert testimony of the value of the business.

Wilson v. Wilson

Issue involves the increase in value of the husband's business during the marriage.

Wright v. Wright

Wife raised issues concerning the court's valuation of a veterinary clinic, including goodwill.

Undocumented shareholder loan not relevant to value

One of the issues in this marital dissolution was the value of the husband’s 7% interest in the family wheat farm, Jensen Seed Farm, Inc.

Separation date value abuse of discretion

During the parties’ marriage, husband founded and operated Cooper Management Institute.

Court affirms value based on capitalization of earnings method

One of the issues in this case was the value of husband's business, Johnson Poured Walls.

176 - 200 of 916 results