Marriage of Nichols, In re
| Citation | 606 P.2d 1314,43 Colo.App. 383 |
| Decision Date | 06 December 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 78-716,78-716 |
| Parties | In re the MARRIAGE OF Neil James NICHOLS, Appellee, and Glenna Ebersole Nichols, Appellant. . III |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Colorado |
Kruse & Lynch, Franklin E. Lynch, Colorado Springs, for appellee.
Cole, Hecox, Tolley, Edwards & Keene, Lawrence A. Hecox, Colorado Springs, for appellant.
Wife appeals the trial court's valuation of marital property and award of maintenance. We reverse.
After twenty-five and one-half years of marriage, husband filed for dissolution. At the time of dissolution, husband was a dentist with a successful practice. The wife's expert witness testified that the husband's dental practice was worth between $29,000 to $31,000. This figure included a valuation of the goodwill of the practice as an intangible asset. The husband testified that the value of his practice was equipment value plus accounts receivable. The court accepted the husband's testimony and rejected the wife's contention that goodwill should be included in the value of the practice, and valued the husband's practice at $10,560.
The trial court ordered the marital property to be divided equally. The family home, which had an equity value of $58,500 was awarded to wife upon payment of $16,622.50 to husband within 90 days to bring husband's share up to 50%. Further, the trial court did not make explicit findings with respect to wife's employment capabilities, the standard of living during marriage, her ability to support herself, or husband's ability to meet his own needs and to assist wife in meeting her needs. Although wife requested maintenance of $1,671.87 per month, the court awarded her only $600 a month.
Wife's contention, that goodwill or "going concern" value, should have been included in the valuation of the husband's dental practice, presents a question of first impression in Colorado.
We start with the proposition that the purpose of division of marital property in a dissolution proceeding is to allocate to each spouse that property which, as a result of the marriage, should properly belong to him or her. In re Marriage of Graham, 194 Colo. 429, 574 P.2d 75 (1978). The Uniform Dissolution of Marriage Act, C.R.S.1973, § 14-10-113, does not explicitly define marital property; however, in Graham, supra, the Supreme Court held that the General Assembly intended that the term "property" be liberally construed to be broadly inclusive. Thus, the issue before us is whether that portion by which the total value of a dental practice exceeds the market value of the furniture, fixtures, and accounts receivable, i. e., the goodwill, constitutes marital property within the broad definition of property under § 14-10-113(2), C.R.S.1973.
The husband argues that his professional goodwill is analogous to an advanced educational degree which has been held not to be marital property subject to division. In re Marriage of Graham, supra. Husband further relies on Nail v. Nail, 486 S.W.2d 761, 52 A.L.R.3d 1338 (Tex.1972) for the proposition that professional goodwill is not an earned or vested property right, but is rather a mere expectancy that his present professional circumstances will continue. We do not so view goodwill in professions where practices are bought and sold.
Goodwill has traditionally been defined as an intangible property right incident to an on-going business with a locality or name. Lerner v. Stone, 126 Colo. 589, 252 P.2d 533 (1952). The underlying theory is that an on-going business has a value greater than its fixtures and accounts receivable, a value which is an asset of the business that can be sold. Such goodwill has been defined as the expectation of continued and repeated public patronage. In re Marriage of Foster, 42 Cal.App.3d 577, 117 Cal.Rptr. 49 (1974).
Professional practices that can be sold for more than the value of their fixtures and accounts receivables have salable goodwill. A professional, like any entrepreneur who has established a reputation for skill and expertise, can expect his patrons to return to him, to speak well of him, and upon selling his practice, can expect that many will accept the buyer and will utilize his professional expertise. These expectations are a part of goodwill, and they have a pecuniary value. In re Marriage of Fleege, 91 Wash.2d 324, 588 P.2d 1136 (1979). While we recognize that professional goodwill is not an asset which has an independent market value, it can, in conjunction with the assets of the practice, be sold. This limited marketability distinguishes professional goodwill from the advanced educational degree, which, because it is personal to its holder and is non-transferable, was held not to be property in Graham, supra.
Husband's contention, that professional goodwill is a mere expectancy is also without merit. The probability of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Prahinski v. Prahinski
...270 Cal.App.2d 401, 75 Cal.Rptr. 735 (1969); Mueller v. Mueller, 144 Cal.App.2d 245, 301 P.2d 90 (1956); In re Marriage of Nichols, 43 Colo.App. 383, 606 P.2d 1314 (1979); Wright v. Wright, 469 A.2d 803 (Del.Fam.Ct.1983); In re Marriage of Kapusta, 141 Ill.App.3d 1010, 96 Ill.Dec. 234, 491 ......
-
Hollander v. Hollander, 1995
...have addressed this issue. The majority of these jurisdictions treat professional goodwill as marital property. In re Marriage of Nichols, 43 Colo.App. 383, 606 P.2d 1314 (1979) (solo dental practice); Wright v. Wright, 469 A.2d 803 (Del.Fam.Ct.1983) (solo dental practice); In re Marriage o......
-
Endres v. Endres, 18812
...v. Wisner, 129 Ariz. 333, 631 P.2d 115 (App.1981); In re Foster, 42 Cal.App.3d 577, 117 Cal.Rptr. 49 (1974); In re Marriage of Nichols, 43 Colo.App. 383, 606 P.2d 1314 (1979); In re Marriage of White, 98 Ill.App.3d 380, 53 Ill.Dec. 786, 424 N.E.2d 421 (1981); Heller v. Heller, 672 S.W.2d 94......
-
May v. May
...represented by the increased value of stock in a family business. Golden, 75 Cal.Rptr. at 737-38. See also In re Marriage of Nichols, 43 Colo.App. 383, 606 P.2d 1314, 1315 (1979) ("A professional, like any entrepreneur who has established a reputation for skill and expertise, can expect his......
-
§ 10.03 Goodwill
...Colorado: Marriage of Huff, 834 P.2d 244 (Colo. 1992); Marriage of Banning, 971 P.2d 289 (Colo. App. 1998); In re Marriage of Nichols, 606 P.2d 1314 (Colo. App. 1979). Connecticut: Eslami v. Eslami, 218 Conn. 801, 591 A.2d 411 (1991). (However, the court does emphasize that goodwill should ......
-
Complex Financial Issues in Family Law Cases - October 2008
...of Simon, 856 P.2d 47 (Colo.App. 1993). 17. In re the Marriage of Miller, 913 P.2d 1314 (Colo. 1996). 18. In re the Marriage of Nichols, 606 P.2d 1314 (Colo.App. 1979). 19. In re the Marriage of Martin, 707 P.2d 1035 (Colo.App. 1985); In re the Marriage of Huff, 834 P.2d 244 (Colo. 1992); I......
-
The Law of Trade Secrecy and Covenants Not to Compete in Colorado-part Ii
...re Marriage of Graff, 902 P.2d 402 (Colo.App. 1994). 5. National Propane Corp., supra, note 4 at 161. See also In re Marriage of Nichols, 606 P.2d 1314 (Colo.App. 6. National Propane Corp., supra, note 4 at 161. See also Gibson v. Eberle, 762 P.2d 777 (Colo.App. 1988). 7. Network Telecommun......
-
Valuing Goodwill: Factors to Consider and Sources of Information
...26 The Colorado Lawyer 53 (April 1997). 2. In re Marriage of Foster, 42 Cal.App.3d 577 (Cal.App. 1974). 3. In re Marriage of Nichols, 606 P.2d 1314 (Colo.App. 4. In re Marriage of Bookout, 833 P.2d 800 (Colo.App. 1991). 5. Pratt, Reilly, and Schweihs, Valuing Small Businesses and Profession......