Dibble v. Dibble

1 N.W.2d 159, 239 Wis. 298, 1941 Wisc. LEXIS 148
CourtWisconsin Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 6, 1941
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1 N.W.2d 159 (Dibble v. Dibble) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Wisconsin Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dibble v. Dibble, 1 N.W.2d 159, 239 Wis. 298, 1941 Wisc. LEXIS 148 (Wis. 1941).

Opinion

Martin, J.

The complaint states a cause of action. Sec. 247.14, Stats., so far as here material, provides :

“In addition to all other allegations, the complaint shall specifically allege whether or not an action for obtaining a divorce by either of the parties was or has been at any time commenced or pending in any other court, or before any judge thereof, in this state, or elsewhere.”

It is alleged that several divorce actions have been commenced in Shawano county; that in each instance the parties have become reconciled and resumed living together; that none of such actions were ever filed in the office of the clerk of court. The defendant demurred on the ground “that it appears upon the face of the complaint that there is another cause of action pending between the same parties for the same cause.” It does not appear from the complaint when these *300 former actions were commenced, by which spouse, or the cause of action alleged. Sec. 247.07, Stats., specifically states seven different causes for divorce from the bonds of matrimony. Sec. 247.08 specifically states five separate causes for divorce from bed and board. The cause for divorce alleged in the instant action is cruel and inhuman treatment of the plaintiff by the defendant; if the cause of action alleged in the ■former actions was any one of the six other causes for divorce specified in sec. 247.07, no other action between the parties would be pending for the same cause.

It follows that the complaint in the instant action does not disclose the pendency of another action between the parties hereto for the same cause. The court below erred in sustaining the defendant’s demurrer and in entering judgment dismissing the action.

By the Court. — Order and judgment reversed. Cause remanded for further proceedings according to law.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Eule v. Eule
93 N.W.2d 438 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 N.W.2d 159, 239 Wis. 298, 1941 Wisc. LEXIS 148, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dibble-v-dibble-wis-1941.