Crider v. Crider

Facts

H and W were married in 1992. They had two children during their marriage, one of whom is now emancipated. W first filed for divorce in 2006 and filed for legal separation in 2007, but both actions were dismissed. In May 2009, W filed another divorce petition. H is involved in a large number of business entities with his father, Robert, and his brother, Steve. The primary family business is Crider & Crider, Inc (CCI). H, Robert, and Steve are the only shareholders of this closely-held S corporation. H owns approximately 42.25% of the stock, Steve 42.25%, and Robert the remaining 15.5%. Two of the other family businesses are Logan Land Development, LLC, ('Logan') and North Park, LLC. H's interest in these entities is 33%. Other business entities at issue here, along with Jeff's interest therein, are: J.E. Crider & Son, LLC (30%), Crider Holding Company, LLC (33%), Crider Family Limited Partnership 1 (24%), Lancor, LLC (50%), North Eastern Holdings, LLC (33%), and South Central Holdings Corp. (33%). Jeff also owned a fifty percent interest in Jefferson Centre, LLC, but it had no value at the time of dissolution. In 1993, Robert, Jeff, and Steve signed a stock transfer restriction agreement with respect to their holdings in CCI. The agreement prohibited any shareholder from encumbering any of their shares without prior written consent from the other shareholders, unless certain narrow exceptions were met. The LLCs also had restrictions on the transfer of membership interests written into their operating agreements. W primarily was a 'stay-at-home' parent taking care of the children, at Jeff's request. Through 2007, CCI regularly made sizeable annual distributions to its shareholders, Jeff, Steve, and Robert. In 2009, the year W filed for divorce, CCI paid no distributions to its shareholders, the shareholders instead loaned $3,784,829 to CCI, and its gross profits were $8,920,606. H's personal net worth was more than $11,000,000. The marital home sold for nearly $1.5 million during the pendency of the divorce. The trial court conducted a dissolution hearing. W's expert placed a total value on CCI of $15.6 million, with the value of H's interest being $4,321,000. There was massive amounts of conflicting testimony and evidence from all the experts involved on just about everything. The trial court largely accepted the methodology and conclusions of W's expert. The trial court found that the total value of Jeff's business and real estate interests in 2009 was over $11 million, which was offset by little marital debt. The trial court also excluded the purported loans from Robert to H as marital liabilities. It did include the note payable by Robert to H as a marital asset, as H agreed it should be. The trial court evenly split the marital estate and required H to make an equalization payment to W of $4,752,066. W was given a security lien on all of H's shares and ownership interests. H did not pay the equalization judgment within the 180 days, and W initiated proceedings to collect. The court awarded W half of H’s shares and ordered the companies not to distribute W’s shares to H. 

The trial court entered both a garnishment order and a writ of attachment.

Issues

Rule of Law

Holding and Decision

Legal Analysis

© 2007-2024 ABN Study Partner.