Brooks v. Brooks

Husband co-founded DigiDesign before his 1989 marriage to Wife. They separated in 2009. In a dissolution action, the court applied the “Van Camp” formula to apportion the appreciation of the DigiDesign stock during the marriage and characterized that increased value as return on Husband’s separate property. The court found that Husband did not contribute to the growth of the business after the date of marriage. The court of appeal affirmed, upholding the use of the Van Camp approach to determine the reasonable value of the community’s services, allocate that amount to community property and the balance to separate property. While the trial court may have erred in finding Husband made no contribution to DigiDesign post-marriage, the record includes substantial evidence demonstrating his post-marriage contributions were not the chief factor in DigiDesign’s growth, despite the court’s seemingly contradictory findings. Substantial evidence also supported a finding that Husband’s DigiDesign salary during the marriage represented adequate compensation to the community so that the remaining increase in the stock value was Husband’s separate property. View "Brooks v. Brooks" on Justia Law