(dissenting) — The trial court concluded that Zeigler Insurance Agency, Inc., had no goodwill. Linda D. Summers (formerly Zeigler) appeals contending this conclusion was error. I agree and therefore respectfully dissent.
The trial court found that Robert E. Zeigler's income was. the result of his skill, knowledge, and hard work, or in other words his earning capacity. Majority, at 607. Implicit in this analysis, which is advanced by both the trial court and the majority, is that a finding of goodwill is therefore precluded. I disagree. The argument has previously been advanced and rejected. See In re Marriage of Hall, 103 Wn.2d 236, 241-42, 692 P.2d 175 (1984); In re Marriage of Brooks, 51 Wn. App. 882, 888, 756 P.2d 161, 79 A.L.R.4th 159, review denied, 111 Wn.2d 1021 (1988). The majority also advances the Zeigler Insurance Agency's status as a captive insurance agency as militating against a finding of goodwill. "[A]ny reasonable expectation of continued patronage is indistinguishably intertwined with the reputation and goodwill of State Farm." Majority, at 608. Again, I disagree.
Goodwill is simply the expectation of continued public patronage — nothing more and nothing less. Hall, at 239. "Among the elements which engender goodwill are continuity of name, location, reputation for honest and fair *610dealing, and individual talent and ability." In re Marriage of Fleege, 91 Wn.2d 324, 325-26, 588 P.2d 1136 (1979). Most, if not all, of these factors are present in the Zeigler Insurance Agency. Even if the agency were to terminate its association with State Farm, the agency still maintains its name, staff, internal procedures and location, all of which are likely to assure public patronage.
I would reverse the trial court's conclusion that there is no goodwill and remand for reconsideration of the value of the goodwill.