## Facts

- Husband and Wife married in 2001, had two children, and separated in 2011.
- During the marriage, Wife developed and operated a closely held retail and online lighting and home-furnishings business, Candelabra, which shifted to predominantly internet sales.
- Ownership of Candelabra was split 51% to Wife and 49% to Husband; Wife served as president and primary driver of operations, marketing, and supplier relationships.
- The parties stipulated Candelabra’s tangible assets were worth $353,687; the main dispute was the value and classification of goodwill.
- Wife’s expert valued the company at about $1.2 million (including goodwill), attributed 20–25% of goodwill to Wife personally, and applied a 20% marketability discount to reach an adjusted value of about $960,000.
- Husband’s expert valued the company at $2.96 million using a later valuation date, did not apply a marketability discount, and largely treated goodwill as enterprise goodwill (conceding at trial that some portion could be personal).
- The family court relied on Husband’s expert, used the later valuation date, classified 90% of goodwill as enterprise goodwill (marital) and 10% as personal goodwill (non-marital), structured a buyout of Husband’s interest, and awarded Husband $122,557 in expert witness fees.
- The parties filed cross-appeals challenging the business valuation, goodwill classification, equitable distribution, and expert-fee award.

## Issues

1. Whether goodwill associated with a closely held business should be divided into enterprise goodwill (marital) and personal goodwill (non-marital) for equitable distribution.
2. Whether the family court erred in its valuation methodology, including valuation date selection, reliance on a single expert, and treatment of marketability considerations.
3. Whether the equitable distribution award required modification based on proper valuation and classification of goodwill.
4. Whether the award of expert witness fees to Husband was proper.

## Decision

- The court affirmed that enterprise goodwill in the business was marital property subject to equitable distribution.
- The court accepted that personal goodwill attributable solely to Wife’s personal reputation, skills, and relationships was non-marital and excluded from the divisible estate.
- After a de novo review, the court modified the valuation and equitable distribution and ordered Wife to pay Husband $338,525 plus interest (as set by the family court) within 90 days after remittitur.
- The court reversed the award of $122,557 in expert witness fees to Husband.

## Legal Principles

- In equitable distribution, goodwill that would continue with the business irrespective of the owner’s continued involvement is enterprise goodwill and is a marital asset.
- Goodwill dependent on the continued presence and performance of a particular owner—attributable solely to that owner’s personal reputation, skills, training, and relationships—is personal goodwill and is not marital property.
- On appeal from the family court, the reviewing court may consider factual and legal issues de novo and may make its own findings by the preponderance of the evidence while still giving weight to the trial court’s credibility determinations.
- Business valuation in divorce may require separating marital from non-marital components, including allocating goodwill and assessing whether post-filing changes in value should affect equitable distribution.
- Expert witness fees in domestic cases must be justified under applicable standards; an unsupported or improper fee award may be reversed.

## Conclusion

The court recognized and applied the distinction between enterprise and personal goodwill in valuing a closely held business for equitable distribution, affirmed inclusion of enterprise goodwill as marital property, recalculated the distribution to require a specific payment to Husband, and reversed a substantial expert-fee award.


Moore v. Moore, 779 S.E.2d 533 (S.C. 2015)