Sunday, December 23, 2012
"The wife was in a unique position to be fully familiar with and knowledgeable about the husband’s assets, both as counsel for Renegade prior to, during, and after marriage, and in assisting the husband with his 1994 divorce and the subsequent settlement of that action.  The wife had full access to and knowledge of the husband’s financial affairs at all material times.  Specifically, her questioning revealed that she had information, prior to the marriage, that the value of Renegade’s assets was inadequate to support its bank loan, such that the respondent was being asked to personally guarantee Renegade’s debt. Although she did not know what the shares of Renegade were worth, it was her evidence during questioning that she understood that the value of the Renegade assets had fallen.  Objectively, this information ought to have raised a question in her mind as to whether the date of marriage value of $7,603,685 being used by the husband in his net family property statement was accurate."

<< Home

Powered by Blogger

.post-title { display: none!important; }