Appeals court hears Moyle v. Moyle dispute over prenup enforcement, expert disclosures and net‑worth valuation

The Utah Court of Appeals heard oral argument in Moyle v. Moyle (No. 20231097), a multi‑issue divorce appeal that contested how a prenuptial agreement was applied, whether a party’s financial expert met disclosure obligations, and how the trial court chose the valuation date for net‑worth calculations.

Appellant Jamie Moyle, represented by Brody Miley, argued the district court erred by admitting expert opinion evidence without production of the expert’s underlying documents and data, by selecting an improper date to calculate net worth, and by awarding limited prevailing‑party attorney fees to the respondent, Brianna Moyle. Bart Johnson argued for Brianna and defended the trial court’s factual findings and discretionary rulings.

Expert disclosure and admissibility

Jamie’s counsel argued the parties did not receive underlying data cited in the opposing expert’s report (identified in the transcript as exhibits and footnotes referencing assessor values, Zillow pages and tax records). Counsel said the expert, identified in the record as Corey Kennedy, relied on documents and valuations that were not produced in discovery and that the court therefore lacked a reliable basis under Utah Rule of Evidence…