Valuation Date

Valuation Date is Division Date.  Determining the valuation date for property division is up to the court’s discretion and done on a case-by-case basis.  In this case, and in most cases, the section 34 factors are to be applied as of the date of divorce and the valuation is to be done as of the date of division.  Davidson v. Davidson, 19 Mass. App. Ct. 364, 376 (1985)
 
Valuation Date Depends on Whether Marital Partnership Continues. The parties were separated ten (10) years before the wife filed a complaint for divorce.  The husband left the home, continued to acquire assets, and the wife continued to care for the children and contributed her salary to the maintenance of herself and the children.  The trial court divided assets as of the date of divorce and not the date of separation because the marital partnership upon which section 34 was founded continued despite the lengthy separation.  Decastro v. Decastro, 415 Mass. 787 (1993)
 
Valuation Date is End of Marital Partnership.  The parties separated in 1985, and divorced in 1989.  The wife moved out of the house, went to Bermuda, leaving the husband to care for their son.  She made no further contribution to the marital partnership, either economically or non-economically. The original 1989 divorce judgment of the parties, for reasons unknown, did not address property division and alimony.  So, in 1995, the court finally addressed those issues. The trial court found that the marital partnership ended in 1989 and granted the wife a share of the martial estate as of that date. The Appeals Court affirmed.   Daugherty v. Daugherty, 50 Mass. App. Ct. 738 (2001)
 
Valuation Date of Marital Assets.  The husband appealed from a divorce judgment in which the marital assets were valued as of the date of the filing of the divorce complaint in 2004. He sought a valuation date of ten years earlier when he alleges that the marriage irretrievably broke down.  Noting that the marital partnership continued until 2004 with the wife assuming child rearing obligations and the husband assuming financial obligations, the Appeals Court upheld the trial court’s judgment.  The Appeals Court also noted that the marital estate is typically divided as of the date of the divorce trial which conflicts with the unusual “filing of divorce” timing employed here by the Probate Court.  Minasian v. Minasian, 73 Mass.App.Ct. 1106 (November 21, 2008) (Unpublished)
 
Corporate Valuations – Post-Trial Motions / Date of Valuation.  The Appeals Court found no abuse of discretion in the Probate and Family Court judge’s denial of the wife’s motions, noting that “[i]t is not uncommon for post-trial events to change the value of a marital asset,” and that the judge had the authority to “consider the interests of the court and the husband in bringing closure to the matter.”  The Appeals Court also set forth that the general rule in Massachusetts is to value the marital estate as of the date of the trial. Caffyn v. Caffyn, 70 Mass.App.Ct. 37 (August 31, 2007)