Send us Fan Mail

Your business is not “just an asset.” For a lot of owners, it’s years of risk, late nights, pride, and a sense of security for the future. That’s why business ownership in an Oregon divorce can turn into one of the most intense parts of the entire case, and why the wrong assumption early on can cost you later.

We sit down with Lewis Landerholm to map out what actually needs to be answered when a company is on the table: Is it marital property or is there a credible separate property claim tied to premarital value or limited marital contribution? What happens when a spouse works in the business and gets underpaid? How do you handle the very real “double dipping” problem where the business is valued for property division and the business income is still used in spousal support?

Then we get practical about business valuation. Different industries require different expertise, and expert opinions can land far apart, sometimes by hundreds of thousands of dollars. We also dig into the messy edge cases that show up in real life: OLCC and other regulated licenses, cannabis-related complications, intellectual property like copyrights, and whether an asset can even be transferred the way people assume. Finally, we talk about entity structure, bylaws, partners, enforcement language in the judgment, and why mediation often gives business owners the time and flexibility that court can’t.

If you’re facing divorce with a business involved, subscribe for more straight answers, share this with someone who needs it, and leave a review so more Oregon families can find the guidance.

If you would like to speak with one of our attorneys, please call our office at (503) 227-0200, or visit our website at https://www.pacificcascadelegal.com.

Disclaimer: Nothing in this communication is intended to provide legal advice nor does it constitute a client-attorney relationship, therefore you should not interpret the contents as such.

Send us Fan Mail

Five assets keep showing up when divorcing couples hit a wall, and the reason is almost never just emotion. It is value. I sit down with founding attorney Lewis Landerholm to unpack why retirement accounts, the marital home, business interests, investment portfolios, and valuable personal property become the flashpoints in divorce and family law cases, especially when each asset carries different tax rules, different volatility, and different paperwork.

We get practical about the hidden math: why pre tax 401(k) dollars are not the same as cash, when pensions require an actuary, and how premarital versus marital components can change the division. Then we move to the marital home, where the deed is often easy but the mortgage can be the real obstacle, particularly when a refinance means higher interest rates and a smaller buying power for the spouse who keeps the property. We also explain why judges tend to choose the simplest clean break if a plan is not realistic, and why vague terms in a divorce decree can lead to expensive enforcement fights years later.

From there we dig into business valuation, including why picking the right valuation expert matters, what happens when both spouses work in the business, and how buyouts can collide with future cash flow and support issues. We also cover investment accounts, RSUs and stock gains, cost basis, and the tax surprises that can dwarf the “headline” account value. Finally, we talk about appraisals for cars, jewelry, art, and even bitcoin, where volatility makes timing and documentation critical.

If you found this helpful, subscribe for more real world divorce guidance, share this with someone sorting out a separation, and leave a review so more families can find clear answers.

If you would like to speak with one of our attorneys, please call our office at (503) 227-0200, or visit our website at https://www.pacificcascadelegal.com.

Disclaimer: Nothing in this communication is intended to provide legal advice nor does it constitute a client-attorney relationship, therefore you should not interpret the contents as such.

Send us Fan Mail

A “high-value asset” is not the same thing as a “high-value check,” and that gap can wreck a divorce settlement. We sit down with Professor Kelly Lise Murray, a wealth dispute resolution educator and real estate collaboration divorce specialist, to unpack the assets that look impressive on a spreadsheet but become brutally complicated the moment you try to divide or sell them.

We talk through the real-world mechanics of divorce asset division when the property is unusual: art collections that have an insured value but no practical resale market, wine collections that can literally disappear bottle by bottle, firearms that raise eligibility and safety questions, and timeshares that can act like a negative asset once annual fees are considered. Along the way, we highlight why judges decide cases based on admissible evidence, why “only one side brought proof” can become the final number, and how the right experts and documentation can prevent costly post-divorce enforcement fights.

You’ll also hear how some courts get surprisingly practical with unique property, including creative approaches to splitting collections, plus what it means to negotiate for enforcement before mediation so you can actually receive what you bargained for. If you’re facing a high net worth divorce, equitable distribution questions, asset valuation disputes, or concerns about dissipation, this conversation will help you think more clearly and prepare more strategically.

Subscribe for more family law guidance, share this with someone sorting out property division, and leave a review if it helped. What’s the strangest or most emotionally charged asset you’ve seen people fight over?

If you would like to speak with one of our attorneys, please call our office at (503) 227-0200, or visit our website at https://www.pacificcascadelegal.com.

To learn more about how Kelly can help you, you can visit her website at: https://vettingthehouse.com/

Disclaimer: Nothing in this communication is intended to provide legal advice nor does it constitute a client-attorney relationship, therefore you should not interpret the contents as such.