Judge Ignores a Business Appraisal in an Arizona Divorce
DUE TO COVID-19 AND OUR NEED TO ENSURE THE HEALTH OF OUR CLIENTS, ALL INITIAL CLIENT CONSULTATIONS WILL BE CONDUCTED BY PHONE. YOU MAY CALL US AT (480)305-8300 TO SCHEDULE A TELEPHONE CALL WITH ONE OF OUR EXPERIENCED FAMILY LAW ATTORNEYS.
We want to talk to you about what can happen if a judge ignores a business appraisal in an Arizona divorce. In the unpublished decision of Sammons v. Keaggy, the Arizona Court of Appeals addressed Beverly Sammons’ (Wife) appeal of the family court judges ruling in a divorce decree ordering her husband, David C. Keaggy, to sell the family business and award Wife 50% of the proceeds from that sale. The order specifically allowed the Husband or the couple’s adult son to purchase the business at a discounted price.
After a forty-year marriage, the wife filed for a dissolution of the parties’ marriage in June of 2012. The couple had equal ownership in David Keaggy & Associates, LLC. The value of the business was one of the major disputes during the divorce proceedings. The husband operated the business and their son had been employed at the company for more than seven years.
The wife presented testimony at trial from an expert witness, Mark Hughes, who specialized in business valuations. The expert estimated value for the business to be $240,000 if the husband continued to operate the business.
In the event the husband intended to sell the business, but assisted the new owner in the operation of the business for a transitional period of six to twelve months, the expert estimated the value of the business to be $190,000.
The husband testified that the valuation was too high, but did not offer any additional evidence as to its value. He further stated that he wanted to retire and that he was unwilling to sell the business if it meant he had to work for an additional 6 to 12 months.
He stated he hoped the parties’ son would run the business, but their son testified he could not purchase the business because he could not afford to buy it. The husband further testified he was willing to dissolve the business or let Wife have it, but that he did not agree to buy her out because he was ready to be done with it.
The Court noted the business was the couple’s most valuable asset and also noted there were not sufficient additional marital assets to offset the value of the business in an award to Wife. Therefore, the trial court ordered the parties to begin the process of preparing the business for sale and to divide the proceeds equally. The order also stated that if the husband or their son wished to buy the business they could do so at a discounted rate of $150,000. The wife moved for a new trial but was unsuccessful.
During the deposition of the parties’ son, he testified that he was willing to purchase the business from the wife for $100,000, which he referred to as a wild guess as to the value of the business as long as he could pay for it in monthly installments.
The other $50,000 he would receive as a “gift” from the husband. The wife argues on appeal that the trial court erred when it ordered the business sold. She states the business should have been awarded to the husband and the court should have imposed a lien on the business (A.R.S. Section 25-318(E)) in order to secure payment from the husband to the wife for $120,000 per the valuation of the business at $240,000.
Discounted Business Appraisals in an Arizona Divorce
Upon its review of the case, the Arizona Court of Appeals noted the order offering a “discounted price” of $150,000 for the husband or son was not supported by any evidence presented at trial. By offering this discounted price, the trial court effectively authorized a $75,000 payment to the wife for her share of the value of the business, which was substantially lower than the valuation according to the only expert who testified at the trial.
Also of interest is the fact that the family court judge did not impose a deadline for the sale of the company. It appears the husband continues to operate the company and that no payment has been made to the wife. Without evidence supporting the $150,000 purchase price, the Court abused discretion in selecting a lower value for the business.
Because there is no evidence supporting the $150,000 “discounted” purchase price, the Court of Appeals of Arizona finds that the Family Court abused its discretion when permitting the husband or their son to purchase the business at the lower valuation. Therefore, the portion of the decree allowing the husband or their son to purchase at a lower value was vacated and remanded for additional orders in compliance with the directive to sell the business and secure the payment to the wife for her 50% share of the value of the business, which is $190,000 according to record.
If you need information about what to do when a judge ignores a business appraisal in Arizona, you should seriously consider contacting the attorneys at Hildebrand Law, PC. Our Arizona divorce attorneys have over 100 years of combined experience successfully representing clients in divorce cases in Arizona.
Our family law firm has earned numerous awards such as US News and World Reports Best Arizona Family Law Firm, US News and World Report Best Divorce Attorneys, “Best of the Valley” by Arizona Foothills readers, and “Best Arizona Divorce Law Firms” by North Scottsdale Magazine.
Call us today at (480)305-8300 or reach out to us through our appointment scheduling form to schedule your personalized consultation and turn your Arizona divorce case around today.
Arizona Family Law Attorneys in Scottsdale and Tucson Arizona
Other Articles About Community Property in Arizona
- Community Lien on Sole and Separate Property in Arizona
- Community Lien in Arizona
- Community Liens Separate Property in Arizona
- Community Property and Personal Guaranty in Arizona
- Determining Community Versus Sole Property in Arizona
- The difference Between Community and Separate Property in Arizona
- Disclaimer Deed in a Divorce in Arizona
- Divide Retirement Accounts in an Arizona Divorce
- Dividing Property Not Included in Divorce Decree in Arizona
- Division of Debt in an Arizona Divorce
- Do Rules Regarding Property Apply to Debts in an Arizona Divorce
- Enforce Division of Property and Debt in an Arizona Divorce
- Enforcing a Property Settlement Agreement in Arizona
- Filing a Lis Pendens in a Divorce in Arizona
- How is Property Divided in a Divorce in Arizona
- How to Divide Property in Arizona When a Spouse is Hiding Assets
- Is All Property Community Property in Arizona
- Is Arizona a 50 50 State in a Divorce
- Is Separate Property Divided in Arizona Divorce
- Marital Property Laws in Arizona
- Military Retirement Pay and Divorce in Arizona
- Pensions and Divorce in Arizona
- Separate Property Used to Purchase a Home During Marriage in Arizona
- Sole and Separate Property Divorce Arizona
- Is a Spouse Liable for Credit Card Debt in Arizona
- Stock Options Divided in an Arizona Divorce Case
- Stock Options in an Arizona Divorce
- Unequal Division of Property in Arizona Divorce
- Unfair Separation Agreement in Arizona
- Valuation and Distribution Options For Pensions in an Arizona Divorce
- What is Community Property in Arizona
- What is Separate Property in Arizona
Chris Hildebrand wrote the information on this page about what happens when a judge ignores a business appraisal in an Arizona divorce to ensure everyone has access to information about family law in Arizona. Chris is a divorce and family law attorney at Hildebrand Law, PC. He has over 24 years of Arizona family law experience and has received multiple awards, including US News and World Report “Top Arizona Divorce Attorneys”, Phoenix Magazine “Top Divorce Law Firms”, and Arizona Foothills Magazine “Best of the Valley” award. He believes the policies and procedures he uses to get his clients through a divorce should all be guided by the principles of honesty, integrity, and, quite frankly, actually caring about what his clients are going through in a divorce or family law case. In short, his practice is defined by the success of his clients. He also manages all of the other attorneys at his firm to make sure the outcomes in their clients’ cases are successful as well.