The Role of Jointly Retained Valuation Experts

When a business is at the center of a divorce, shareholder dispute, or similar conflict, valuation often becomes one of the most expensive, time-consuming, and contentious aspects of the case. The traditional approach—each side retaining its own valuation expert—frequently results in competing conclusions, protracted litigation, and escalating professional fees. In the right circumstances, a jointly retained (or neutral) valuation expert can offer a more efficient and constructive alternative.

A jointly retained valuation expert is engaged by both parties, typically through counsel, to provide a single, independent opinion of value. While this approach may seem counterintuitive in an adversarial setting, it can be highly effective when expectations are aligned and the engagement is properly structured.

Why Consider a Joint Valuation?

Cost efficiency is often the most compelling reason to consider a jointly retained expert. Rather than paying for dueling valuation reports, rebuttals, depositions, and trial testimony, the parties share the cost of one comprehensive analysis. In divorce matters, this can help preserve marital assets that might otherwise be consumed by professional fees. In commercial disputes, it can materially reduce litigation costs and encourages earlier resolution.

Joint valuations also tend to streamline the process. With one expert gathering data and performing the analysis, there is far less duplication of effort and fewer procedural delays. A neutral valuation can clarify key issues early, narrow the range of disagreement, and provide a common factual framework for settlement discussions.

When a Neutral Approach Works Best

Jointly retained valuations are not appropriate in every case. They tend to work best when there is a basic level of trust between the parties and when valuation—rather than ownership or control—is the primary issue in dispute.

For example, we have served as the jointly retained valuation expert as an alternative to a three-appraiser buy-sell agreement provision following the death of a controlling shareholder in a service company. In that matter, the parties agreed in advance to be bound by our valuation for purposes of buying out the shareholder’s estate, avoiding delay, cost, and uncertainty at a sensitive time.

Similarly, jointly retained valuations we’ve worked on were particularly effective in marital dissolution cases where ownership of the business was not contested, the divorce was later in life (“gray divorce”), and the settlement process was relatively amicable. In these situations, a neutral valuation can support efficient resolution while minimizing emotional and financial strain.

If a matter involves serious allegations of fraud, concealment, or requires extensive forensic investigation, a neutral engagement may not be feasible. However, disagreement alone does not make a joint valuation unworkable. Many parties are able to cooperate on valuation even when other issues remain contested—especially when clear protocols are established at the outset.

The Valuation Expert’s Role

In a jointly retained engagement, the valuation expert’s role differs fundamentally from that of a party-retained advocate. Neutral experts must be transparent, objective, and even-handed in all interactions. Engagement terms typically address information requests, interviews, communications, and how conclusions will be presented.
Experience matters. A neutral expert should have specific experience in jointly retained engagements, relevant subject matter knowledge, and the ability to explain conclusions clearly to both legal and non-legal audiences.

Managing Expectations

A neutral valuation will rarely deliver a perfect outcome for either side. Joint experts do not advocate for a position, and their conclusions often fall between the extremes that opposing experts might otherwise present. When parties understand this early, the valuation is far more likely to facilitate resolution rather than fuel further conflict.

When used thoughtfully, jointly retained valuation experts can provide a credible, efficient path through business valuation disputes—benefiting attorneys, business owners, and the courts alike.

Key Takeaways for Advisors (Attorneys & CPAs)

• Joint valuations can materially reduce cost and shorten dispute timelines
• Particularly effective where valuation—not ownership—is the core issue
• Well-suited for buy-sell disputes, estates, and amicable or “gray” divorces
• Clear engagement terms and agreed-upon scope are critical
• Managing client expectations early improves outcomes

Shannon Lowther, CFA, ASA, ABV, is the Managing Partner of Central Pacific Valuation.