The Pennsylvania Superior Court vacated in part an equitable distribution order because the lower court double counted assets. Wife filed a complaint in divorce seeking equitable distribution of the marital property, and she filed a praecipe for lis pendens concerning various real estate properties. Husband filed an exception to the master’s report and recommendation. The trial court denied Husband’s exceptions to the master’s report and recommendation. Husband appealed, and the Superior Court reversed in part. The Court ruled that the trial court “was required to choose one method of valuing the business and its assets. Thus, while the trial court did not err in accepting Wife’s valuation method of the business, the court erred in including the business assets as separate marital property when they were already evaluated as part of the business.”
