Representative Image (AI-generated)
A New York couple who married in 1993 and operated several businesses during their marriage have had their divorce-related property settlement upheld by an appeals court. On October 22, 2026, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department, affirmed a judgment awarding Shirley F. Atkins $6,833,448 from the marital estate following her divorce from James C. James and Shirley Atkins married in 1993 and have two adult children. During their marriage, they owned and operated several businesses before eventually forming Northline Ventures, Inc., a utility construction company that James solely owned until 2020. That year, he redeemed 20% of his shares in the company in exchange for a promissory note worth $5,394,463, carrying 6% interest and payable in 80 quarterly instalments of $116,241. James filed for divorce in January 2022, and Shirley subsequently filed her own claims for divorce and related relief. In December 2024, a trial court in Clinton County determined that Shirley was entitled to 22.5% of James’s ownership interest in Northline Ventures, 22.5% of the quarterly payments arising from the stock sale and 22.5% of the value of his partial interests in Wild Goose Club, Inc. , and SS & J Northeast Development, LLC. Together, these awards amounted to $6.83 million. She argued that she should receive 50% of James’s interest in Northline Ventures, while he maintained that her share should be limited to 10%. The judges noted that Shirley had contributed directly to Northline Ventures between 2009 and 2014. The trial court directed James to make an initial payment of $1 million towards Shirley’s award. The remaining balance, slightly more than $5.8 million, was to be paid in quarterly instalments of $150,000, with 5% interest until the amount was fully paid. Shirley challenged the 5% rate, arguing that the balance should carry the statutory interest rate of 9%.
The court therefore found no reason to disturb the 22.5% award.
According to the court’s decision in Atkins v. Atkins. Atkins, published by Justia , the award included a share of the husband’s interest in Northline Ventures, a utility construction business, payments from a stock sale and interests in two other companies. Both spouses had challenged aspects of the distribution. Northline Ventures subsequently sold those shares to an employee stock ownership plan, or ESOP. The couple reached agreements on most property-distribution issues, but several questions remained unresolved and proceeded to trial. Both spouses challenged the percentage awarded to Shirley. The appeals court rejected both arguments, finding that the trial court had appropriately considered the circumstances of the marriage and the parties’ contributions. She had also played substantial roles in the couple’s other businesses and projects while serving as the primary caretaker for their children. However, the court also considered Shirley’s acknowledgement that the construction company’s success was largely attributable to James’s vision and work. Its most profitable years came after her direct involvement had ended, and the evidence did not establish that its subsequent increase in value resulted from her indirect contributions. It also upheld her share of the stock-sale payments, noting that the payments represented compensation for marital property sold during the marriage. The appeals court rejected her argument.