The Mechanics of Business Valuation in California Divorces
California Divorce, Spousal Support

The Mechanics of Business Valuation in California Divorces

Leave a comment

In California, the assets of a married couple seeking divorce must be distributed on an equal basis to the extent they were accumulated during the period of marriage. These assets are known as community property. Sometimes, however, one party owns or has an interest in a business that preexists the marriage. That interest is considered separate property.

Even though a business interest may be considered separate property, part of any appreciation in value that occurred during the marriage may be allocated to community property. In order for that to occur, a value must be established for the business. This is a very complicated task that is performed by a variety of professionals such as business appraisers, certified public accountants, economists, and financial analysts.  

Business valuations normally use one of two methods, depending on the nature of the business. These two approaches were established in case law in the beginning of the 20th century and still stand today. Pereira v. Pereira, decided by the Supreme Court of California in 1909, and Van Camp v. Van Camp, decided by the Court in 1921, set the course for allocation of business value to community property.

The difference between the two approaches hinges on the participation of the owning spouse in the operation of the business. Under Pereira, if that spouse was an active operator or manager of the business, appreciation in its market value during the marriage is likely to be considered community property. This is often the case with professional services such as legal or dental practices, as well as with small contractors or retail businesses.

On the other hand, the Van Camp method usually applies if the business was of such a size and structure that the owning spouse did not expend personal effort affecting its income and growth. In that case, appreciation is less likely to be included in community property and subject to equal division. Any amount included would be based on an assessment of the owning spouse’s compensation from the business during the marriage, as well as whether that compensation sufficiently contributed to the accumulation of other community property. This approach would be appropriate for larger manufacturing, contracting, or technology businesses.

The methods of business valuation are complex, and they vary depending on the type of business involved. At a basic level, valuation involves establishing how much a business is worth at the time of marriage and at the time of divorce or separation. The difference in the two values is then considered in light of proper method noted above. Courts will generally accept a business valuation method as long as the evidence on the record legitimately supports the value.

As you might imagine, the value of a business and how it is allocated to marital assets can make a substantial difference in a what both spousal and support orders. If your marriage involves a business interest, you should hire an attorney with substantial experience in complicated divorce cases, especially those involving the valuation of business assets. Judy L. Burger and her team have considerable experience in contested family law matters, and Judy is well-versed in business matters. Submit our Contact form today or call (415) 259-6636 to arrange an appointment.

The Intentional Breach of a Spouse's Fiduciary Duty
California Divorce, Marriage

The Intentional Breach of a Spouse’s Fiduciary Duty

A fiduciary duty is one in which one party owes another the highest duty of care. For example, someone serving as an executor of an estate has a duty to handle its property and finances with the utmost care. An executor cannot misappropriate money or steal property belonging to the estate, or he may be liable for damages.

Similarly, California law places a fiduciary duty on each spouse to act in the best interest of the other spouse. California Family Code § 721 explains that spouses have “a duty of the highest good faith and fair dealing” with each other and that “neither shall take any unfair advantage of the other.” This fiduciary duty includes three core components: (1) allowing access to records of financial transactions; (2) providing accurate and complete information about community property transactions; and (3) treating benefits and profits from certain community property transactions fairly and accounting to the other spouse for them.

 In addition, California law provides a duty of full disclosure regarding all community assets. The duty applies during the period of marriage and after the parties separate, until the item is divided by the court or the parties. Indeed, the California laws regarding divorce provide a formal method by which the assets and liabilities of each party are disclosed to the other.

What happens if one spouse does not perform his or her fiduciary duties? The failure to perform these duties is a called a “breach,” and the law sets forth what happens when there is a breach. The consequence that is imposed depends upon the seriousness of the breach and the view of the family court.

Examples of ways that parties may breach their fiduciary duties include hiding assets or transferring assets to try to deprive the other spouse of any interest in them. The law provides several remedies, or consequences, for a breach of spousal fiduciary duties, including the following:

  • A court-ordered accounting and determination of rights of ownership;
  • The placement of the name of a party on the title of an asset;
  • An award of either 50% of an undisclosed or transferred asset or of an amount of money to compensate the injured party for the loss of interest in that asset; and
  • Attorney’s fees and court costs.
In particularly egregious cases, the family court can order the breaching party to give the injured party the whole asset or to pay the injured party its full value . When fraud, oppression, or malice have been adequately proven, the court may award punitive damages, designed to punish the breaching party . It is sometimes necessary to hire a forensic accountant to show that a spouse intentionally breached his or her fiduciary duty. A forensic accountant is trained to trace funds and assets, which can help demonstrate that a spouse intended to hide or misappropriate community assets.

Breach of the spousal fiduciary duty is serious wrongdoing. If you are concerned that your spouse may be attempting to hide or minimize assets, you need an aggressive lawyer who will fight on your behalf. The attorneys at the Law Offices of Judy L. Burger have extensive experience in contested divorce and property proceedings. Call today to learn how our attorneys can protect your property interests as you go through this difficult time: (415) 293-8314.
Who Gets the Family Home in a California Divorce?
California Divorce

Who Gets the Family Home in a California Divorce?

In a divorce, one of the most significant concerns is what will happen with the family home. This is particularly true when minor children are involved.

The family residence is often the largest asset owned by the parties to a divorce, so the financial interest is often significant. In addition, there can be a sentimental attachment to the home. For these reasons, dividing the parties’ interest in the family home can be easier said than done. The first task is to decide who actually owns the house. You can learn more about determining basic ownership interests here.

 It is not always easy to apply property law when dividing the family residence. For instance, what happens if the down payment was made with separate property funds? What if both parties contributed to pay down the mortgage while they were married, but the home is titled in just one name?

When there is a community property interest in the residence, there are three basic ways it can be divided: (1) sell the property outright and apply the profits toward the couple’s community property estate, to be divided; (2) one spouse buys out the other’s interest, assuming the purchasing spouse has adequate funds or credit to do so; and (3) deferred sale.

The first two of these options are fairly straightforward. However, a “deferred sale of home order”, also known as a “Duke” order (named after a significant case on the issue), requires some explanation. Deferred sales are usually considered when the parties have minor children and want the children to be able to stay in the family home until a later date. A custodial parent, in these situations, is given exclusive use and possession of the home on a temporary basis so that the kids can stay there.

 In determining whether to allow a deferred sale, the family court must first consider whether it is economically feasible to do so. The court must balance the relative hardship of the parent and children staying in the home with the hardship placed upon the parent no longer living there. The law requires that certain factors be considered in making these determinations. It also requires that the deferred sale of home order contain an end date, such as the date the youngest minor child attains the age of majority or graduates from high school.

In addition to the disposition of the home, the family court will have to determine whether one party must reimburse the other for “contributions for the acquisition of property”. These reimbursements may be required if one party made the down payment on the family residence out of separate funds. They may also be required if separate funds are used to pay down the principal on the home.

As you can see, many factors impact how the family residence is handled in a divorce. How these issues are presented can significantly affect your outcome. Judy Burger is experienced in complex property division matters and how to present those in family court. Please contact her today at (415) 259-6636.