Schubert v. Schubert

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Schubert v. Schubert

9 N.W.2d 636, 243 Wis. 124, 1943 Wisc. LEXIS 83

DecidedApril 13, 1943

StatusPublished

This text of 9 N.W.2d 636 (Schubert v. Schubert) 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

Schubert v. Schubert, 9 N.W.2d 636, 243 Wis. 124, 1943 Wisc. LEXIS 83 (Wis. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

Fairchild, J.

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in its division of property. The rule recognized in Wisconsin is that the division of property in a divorce case *126 is a matter peculiarly within the discretion of the trial court. Voegeli v. Voegeli, 204 Wis. 363, 236 N. W. 123 (authorities cited). While the division made by the trial court was generous to respondent, in view of her $2,500 contribution we do not consider it unduly so except that appellant should be awarded the personal property listed as his in the order of October 3, 1942, i. e., the tools, etc.

Counsel for appellant, having agreed to accept the assessed value as the true value of the homestead, is not now in a position to challenge the finding of the trial court.

By the Court. — Judgment modified so as to award the above described personalty to'the appellant, and as modified affirmed. No costs allowed. Appellant to pay clerk’s fees.

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

Fairchild, J.

Appellant contends that the trial court erred in its division of property. The rule recognized in Wisconsin is that the division of property in a divorce case *126 is a matter peculiarly within the discretion of the trial court. Voegeli v. Voegeli, 204 Wis. 363, 236 N. W. 123 (authorities cited). While the division made by the trial court was generous to respondent, in view of her $2,500 contribution we do not consider it unduly so except that appellant should be awarded the personal property listed as his in the order of October 3, 1942, i. e., the tools, etc.

Counsel for appellant, having agreed to accept the assessed value as the true value of the homestead, is not now in a position to challenge the finding of the trial court.

By the Court. — Judgment modified so as to award the above described personalty to'the appellant, and as modified affirmed. No costs allowed. Appellant to pay clerk’s fees.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

9 N.W.2d 636, 243 Wis. 124, 1943 Wisc. LEXIS 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schubert-v-schubert-wis-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack