Discovery
CONNECTICUT: Brycki v. Brycki, 91 Conn. App. 579, 881 A.2d 1056 (2005)
Both parties offered flawed values for a piece of marital real property, and the husband failed to submit an affordable third-party appraisal, even after the trial court suggested that more evidence was needed to reach a reliable value. Given these facts, the trial court did not err as against the husband by valuing the property at one-half of the husband's valuation, even though that valuation was not supported by any specific evidence. The wife did not waive her interest in the property by failing to value it on her financial statement, where she submitted a single combined value for it and an adjacent property.
Read More About This Case
CONNECTICUT: Brycki v. Brycki, 91 Conn. App. 579, 881 A.2d 1056 (2005)
Both parties offered flawed values for a piece of marital real property, and the husband failed to submit an affordable third-party appraisal, even after the trial court suggested that more evidence was needed to reach a reliable value. Given these facts, the trial court did not err as against the husband by valuing the property at one-half of the husband's valuation, even though that valuation was not supported by any specific evidence. The wife did not waive her interest in the property by failing to value it on her financial statement, where she submitted a single combined value for it and an adjacent property.
Read More About This Case
MONTANA: In re Marriage of Steinbeisser, 313 Mont. 74, 60 P.3d 441 (2002).
The trial court erred by accepting values for marital property given on a financial statement submitted by the husband for loan purposes. A bank officer acknowledged that the values contained on this sort of statement are often inaccurate. The trial court erred by awarding the wife two-thirds of the appreciation in the husband's premarital property. There was no showing that the wife contributed to the property, and no attempt to account for the difference between growth attributable to marital contributions and growth attributable to passive market forces. The wife was not allowed to complain about certain debts which the husband failed to disclose on his mandatory financial statement, as the wife had likewise failed to disclose similar debts on her statement.
Read More About This Case
- All Discovery Cases of Interest
- Recent Cases of Interest
|
|
