The couple had one child. During the marriage, wife was primarily a homemaker. At the time of trial, wife was pregnant, but husband was not the father. The trial court valued and divided marital assets and debts and awarded spousal maintenance and some attorney fees to wife. On appeal, wife challenges many of the findings and conclusions.
Husband challenges the award of attorney fees.
We affirm as modified. Because a trial court has broad discretion in dividing property, its decision will stand, unless it has abused that discretion. In determining the value of a closely held business, a trial court abuses its discretion by failing to take into consideration the relevant facts and the fundamental factors appropriate for use and analysis in the value of a closely held corporation. In Flynn, even though one expert's estimates of the value of various limited partnerships were approximately double another's estimates, the trial court did not abuse its discretion by averaging the two valuations. An averaging approach can, however, be unfair if it is arbitrary, as when the trial court makes no findings demonstrating why or how it arrived at the valuation figure.