Expand the following panels for additional search options.

Neutral valuer does what he can with limited info

In a California divorce case, a court-appointed valuation expert was caught in the middle of a squabbling couple who didn’t provide enough information to value all the marital assets, including business interests.

In re Hebert

In this New Hampshire divorce appeal, the husband appealed the trial court’s property division, the awarding of 13 years of alimony, awarding of 100% of the proceeds of the sale of residences, and awarding 50% of the value of the husband’s business and the real estate where the business was located. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire affirmed in part and remanded in part.

New Hampshire Supreme Court Affirms in Part and Vacates in Part and Remands Divorce Trial Court—Husband Fails to Provide Support for Expenses

In this New Hampshire divorce appeal, the husband appealed the trial court’s property division, the awarding of 13 years of alimony, awarding of 100% of the proceeds of the sale of residences, and awarding 50% of the value of the husband’s business and the real estate where the business was located. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire affirmed in part and remanded in part.

In re Hembree

In this appeal of a denied motion by the wife to set aside a marital settlement order, the appellate court affirmed the trial court. The wife claimed that the husband did not disclose a number of marital assets and misrepresented the values of certain marital assets. The trial court appointed its own expert for valuation of assets. The expert was unable to value a number of the assets for lack of information including a lack of proof of existence of some alleged assets.

Appellate Court (California) Affirms Denial of Wife’s Motion Claiming Missing Assets and Undervalued Assets

In this appeal of a denied motion by the wife to set aside a marital settlement order, the appellate court affirmed the trial court. The wife claimed that the husband did not disclose a number of marital assets and misrepresented the values of certain marital assets. The trial court appointed its own expert for valuation of assets. The expert was unable to value a number of the assets for lack of information including a lack of proof of existence of some alleged assets.

In re Burg

The debtor withheld records and failed to explain missing assets and deleted records and misled the court as to what he did with certain assets. The debtor also knowingly and fraudulently withheld records from the trustee. This was all part of a scheme the debtor devised with the help of a “consultant” to avoid repaying the plaintiff creditors.

Bankruptcy Court Denies Debtor Discharge for Fraud, Failure to Produce Records and Fraudulent Transfers

The debtor withheld records and failed to explain missing assets and deleted records and misled the court as to what he did with certain assets. The debtor also knowingly and fraudulently withheld records from the trustee. This was all part of a scheme the debtor devised with the help of a “consultant” to avoid repaying the plaintiff creditors.

California Appellate Court Affirms That the Marital Settlement Agreement Should Not Be Set Aside for Alleged Inadequate Disclosures

The husband and wife entered into a settlement agreement as to their divorce that was included in the trial court’s judgment of dissolution. The wife thereafter asked the trial court to set the agreement aside due to, among other things, the husband’s failure to disclose his ownership interests in various businesses. The appellate court found the evidence for her motion(s) to be lacking and affirmed the trial court.

In re Hettinga

The husband and wife entered into a settlement agreement as to their divorce that was included in the trial court’s judgment of dissolution. The wife thereafter asked the trial court to set the agreement aside due to, among other things, the husband’s failure to disclose his ownership interests in various businesses. The appellate court found the evidence for her motion(s) to be lacking and affirmed the trial court.

Novosel v. Azcon Inc.

In this ESOP-related case, the plaintiff (an ESOP plan beneficiary) raised three complaints, two of which were primarily the result of the performance and use by the ESOP of an interim valuation date for measurement of the value of her shares for her retirement payments made over time. There was also discussion regarding the interim value determined and whether a PPP loan of $1.2 million should have been considered. The defendants moved for dismissal on the first two accounts. The court denied the dismissal of the first complaint in regard to assertions that the use of the interim valuation date was arbitrary and capricious. It also allowed the filing by the plaintiff of a second amended complaint. The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint regarding the asserted cutback of accrued benefits.

ESOP Case Motions Revolve Primarily Around an Interim Valuation and Consideration of a PPP Loan

In this ESOP-related case, the plaintiff (an ESOP plan beneficiary) raised three complaints, two of which were primarily the result of the performance and use by the ESOP of an interim valuation date for measurement of the value of her shares for her retirement payments made over time. There was also discussion regarding the interim value determined and whether a PPP loan of $1.2 million should have been considered. The defendants moved for dismissal on the first two accounts. The court denied the dismissal of the first complaint in regard to assertions that the use of the interim valuation date was arbitrary and capricious. It also allowed the filing by the plaintiff of a second amended complaint. The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint regarding the asserted cutback of accrued benefits.

Furrer v. Siegel & Rouhana, LLC

A name attorney in a Maryland law firm withdrew after having his license suspended. He sued the firm for compensation for his 26.5% interest in the firm. The firm countersued for damages related to his mistreatment of client accounts. The trial court determined a value of his interest and also determined damages that the attorney owed the firm for his mistreatment of client accounts. The appellate court affirmed the damages but remanded the valuation of the 26.5% interest.

Maryland Appellate Court Remands for Valuation of Withdrawing Member’s Interest in Law Firm and Affirms Damages Award

A name attorney in a Maryland law firm withdrew after having his license suspended. He sued the firm for compensation for his 26.5% interest in the firm. The firm countersued for damages related to his mistreatment of client accounts. The trial court determined a value of his interest and also determined damages that the attorney owed the firm for his mistreatment of client accounts. The appellate court affirmed the damages but remanded the valuation of the 26.5% interest.

Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors of LB Steel, LLC v. Steelcast Ltd. (In re LB Steel, LLC)

The Bankruptcy Court in this case dealt with an adversary complaint from the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. The committee sought to avoid and recover payments the debtor made within the 90 days leading up to the bankruptcy filing to the parent company. For reasons including that the debtor was insolvent during that 90-day period, the court decided in favor of the committee and ordered the payments avoided and ordered the parent company to repay the debtor’s estate.

Bankruptcy Court Orders Parent Company to Repay Payments Within 90 Days of Filing

The Bankruptcy Court in this case dealt with an adversary complaint from the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. The committee sought to avoid and recover payments the debtor made within the 90 days leading up to the bankruptcy filing to the parent company. For reasons including that the debtor was insolvent during that 90-day period, the court decided in favor of the committee and ordered the payments avoided and ordered the parent company to repay the debtor’s estate.

How to value a business and settle a divorce during COVID-19; divorce professionals share tips

How do you resolve a divorce case during COVID-19, when many businesses in all kinds of industries are coping with significant losses and continuing uncertainty over future performance? This was the topic of an excellent panel discussion that was part of the recent virtual AAML/BVR divorce conference.

M.I.C. Ltd. v Commissioner

The Tax Court determined that none of the price paid for the city’s threatened condemnation of property operated as a multipurpose adult entertainment complex was attributable to goodwill or going-concern value. In so doing, the Tax Court made its own determination of the fair market value of the real estate.

Tax Court Determines That Gain on Sale of Property to the City Is All Related to the Property and Therefore Is Deferred Under IRC Sec. 1033

The Tax Court determined that none of the price paid for the city’s threatened condemnation of property operated as a multipurpose adult entertainment complex was attributable to goodwill or going-concern value. In so doing, the Tax Court made its own determination of the fair market value of the real estate.

18 results