A court may use the book value and cost approaches to value interests in business entities. The parties married in 1993 and have one child. In 2008, the trial court awarded the wife alimony and child support of $6,000 per month, for a maximum of eight years, and lump sum alimony of $1.7 million. The husband's family owned real estate companies, and the lump sum was based on the valuation of real property and cash held by corporations in which the husband held a minority interest. The husband appealed the award of lump sum alimony. The husband argued that there was a lack of a ready market for the closely held business entities and certain restrictions on his ability to transfer shares. The Appellate Court reversed, because the trial court failed to assess the marketability and the amount that a willing buyer would pay for the husband's business interests. On remand, the trial court considered the restrictive stock agreements and used the book value approach to value the husband's interests in Brooks Torrey & Scott Inc., Westfair Inc. and Westbrook Inc. at $51,464 as of 2007. The court used the cost approach to value the husband's interest in Milford Realty, which was not subject to a restrictive shareholders agreement, at $151,861. The court awarded the wife alimony of $9,000 per month, effective May 27, 2008, until the wife or the husband's death, plus child support of $458 week, also effective May 27, 2008. The court reduced child support to $312 per week, effective March 12, 2012. The court awarded lump sum alimony of $150,000. The court ordered the husband to maintain $1 million in life insurance, as long as he is obligated to pay support. The husband may reduce the amount of life insurance to $500,000, as soon as the party's child graduates from college or is 23 years old, whichever takes place first. The court awarded the wife $410,534 of the proceeds from the sale of a residence. The court awarded the husband his interests in four business entities and the distributions he received from another two business entities.   

 

VIEW FULL CASE