One Couple’s Story
A Creative Business Solution

The scenario. John and Laura were married 30 years. Together they started and ran a construction company, until Laura retired from the business several years ago to prepare for a new career in social work.

What John wanted. A settlement that would keep him from paying out a large sum (which the business did not have), so he could afford to continue working and keep the construction company from going under.

What Laura wanted. Remuneration for her share of the business she co-founded and helped to manage.

What happened. John agreed to pay Laura monthly support, which she could add to the income from her new job and investments to meet her living expenses. In addition, he would write her a second check – to be paid even if she remarried – which meant she could save money until he retired. John was not required to sell the business or borrow against it. However, when he retired or if he did sell the company, Laura would be entitled to 20% of the net proceeds from the sale at that time.

Kimberly’s analysis. Both John and Laura appreciated the input of a financial advisor in reaching a mutually satisfactory divorce settlement. John was relieved that his payments to Laura were manageable, spread over time, and allowed him to keep his job running the construction company. Laura was pleased that her share in the business was fairly acknowledged, even if she remarried. Collaboration made all the difference in this case. A court could only have viewed the business as a marital asset and awarded a set percentage of its value to the wife. Neither John nor Laura wanted this to happen, because it would have depleted or emptied the company coffers and thus destroyed both John’s livelihood and the value of the business they both hoped would increase over time. Instead, the two of them were able to come up with a unique plan which combined an immediate and long-term payout.