Colorado Supreme Court Rules in the Thornhill Case: Marketability Discounts and Threshold Test for Maintenance at Issue

On June first, 2010 the Colorado Supreme Court handed down it's long awaited ruling on In re Marriage of Thornhill,Case No. 08SC777.

Two legal issues were decided in Colorado Family Law.

1. Valuation of closely held business assets: Marketability Discounts can apply.
Often times, when you are dividing a marital estate in a divorce matter, a question arises as to the value of one spouse's share in an ongoing business enterprise. If that ownership share was generated during the marriage, then it is a marital asset and subject to division. When a business share is in a company that is not traded on the stock market, there may be no ready trading market for those shares. A marketability discount adjusts the value of specific shares downward to reflect the fact that there is no ready trading market for the shares.

In the Thornhill case, the husband had started and owned shares in an oil and gas service company that was not publicly traded. The Company was valued at 2.5 million, however, the Trial Court had agreed to a Marketability Discount of 33% which brought the value down to 1.625 million for the purpose of division of the marital estate. The wife argued that a Marketability Discount should not occur in a divorce matter (comparing it to minority shareholders when they are being forced out). The Appellate Court disagreed and so did the Supreme Court holding that the Trial Court does have the discretion to use a Marketability Discount if the circumstances warrant it.

2. The Parties' current "Standard of Living" should be looked at as part of the Threshold Test for awarding Maintenance:
When determining if Maintenance should be awarded, the Court looks in part at the following:
a. Whether the spouse seeking maintenance lacks sufficient property, including marital property apportioned to him or her, to provide for his or her reasonable needs, and
b. Is unable to support himself or herself through appropriate employment or is the custodian of a child whose condition or circumstances make it appropriate that the custodian not be required to seek employment outside the house.

The Trial Court in Thornhill considered whether Wife could "maintain her lifestyle" as part of the initial determination that she was entitled to maintenance. The Court of Appeals held that the Court should not have considered her current lifestyle or current standard of living in making that determination. They decided that the Court should only have looked at the standard of living to determine the amount of Maintenance but not for the initial determination of entitlement to Maintenance.

The Colorado Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeals on this issue. They have made it clear that "the parties' standard of living during the marriage is in fact an appropriate-- and even necessary-- starting point for the trial court's determination of a particular spouse's reasonable needs or whether a spouse would be able to support herself through appropriate employment." In re Marriage of Thornhill, No. 08SC777,(Colo. 2010).

Here is a possible example: Lets say that a couple is getting divorced after 20 years of marriage. The wife works full time at 100,000 per year but her husband has made over one million dollars per year for the last two years. If the parties' standard of living was one that reflected their recent combined income at the time of divorce, then this would be relevant in the Court's determination of the wife's eligibility for Maintenance even though she is able to care for herself at her current income level. The parties' current standard of living is relevant to determining her reasonable needs. The term "Reasonable" is in light of their current standard of living.

If you have further questions about how this case might apply to your situation, feel free to visit our website or call our offices at 303-329-3802 and ask for Leslie Matthews.