Bate Land Co. LP v. Bate Land & Timber LLC (Lawyers Weekly No. 001-214-17, 21 pp.) (Allyson Duncan, J.) 16-2037; Dec. 6, 2017; USDC at Wilmington, N.C. (Terrence Boyle, J.) 4th Cir. Holding: The bankruptcy court has specialized expertise in ...

Tagged with: valuation

Hanckel Jr. v. Campbell (In re Hanckel III) (Lawyers Weekly No. 003-021-15, 33 pp.) (David Duncan, C.J.) 11-80116; B.S.C. Holding: Both state law and the Bankruptcy Code provide for the court to rule on the value of a dissociated membership ...

Tagged with: valuation

In re Low Country Land, LLC S.C. Code Ann. § 33-44-601(7)(iv) gives a limited liability company member 90 days to contest the appointment of a receiver before the member is dissociated. In that 90-day time period, the LLC member can still exercise his authority as a member.

Tagged with: Bankruptcy Corporate Real Property valuation

Buist v. Buist The family court did not identify all the parties’ marital property but instead selectively divided certain real and personal property without determining the fair market value of all the property. The family court also failed to determine the direct and indirect contributions of the parties to the acquisition of the marital property. The record does not indicate a value of the marital estate or the fairness of the overall apportionment.

Tagged with: Domestic Relations Equitable Distribution Parent & Child valuation

Asmussen v. Asmussen Even though the plaintiff-wife’s expert valued the defendant-husband’s retirement plan at $76,901, the husband testified that his retirement plan was valued at $31,000 immediately before the hearing, and the expert admitted that, as of the hearing, the only amount the husband could have gotten from his plan was the cash surrender value, which would probably have been a little less than $31,889. We find no error in the trial court’s valuation of the retirement plan at $31,000, using the present cash value method. We affirm the family court’s equitable distribution order.

Tagged with: Domestic Relations Equitable Distribution valuation

Wannamaker v. Wannamaker Even though, in her motion for reconsideration, the defendant-wife attempted to justify her entitlement to a credit for mortgage payments by arguing there was no award of temporary alimony, the wife never asked the family court to reconsider its decision not to award her retroactive alimony in its final divorce decree. Since the divorce judgment was already more than 10 days old, the family court lacked the authority to alter or amend the judgment on its own initiative. The family court abused its discretion in awarding the wife retroactive alimony in its amended divorce decree. The family court’s amended divorce decree is affirmed in part and reversed in part.

Tagged with: Domestic Relations Equitable Distribution valuation

Lewis v. Lewis Our de novo review of the family court's ruling convinces us that the family court reached the correct decisions as to valuation of the marital home and as to taxing expert witness fees to the respondent-husband.

Tagged with: Appeals Equitable Distribution valuation