Wenzel v. Wenzel
This text of 295 N.W. 493 (Wenzel v. Wenzel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering South Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This is an appeal from an order amending a final decree in a divorce proceeding so as to relieve the former husband from all obligation with reference to accrued past due and future permanent allowances for the support of the former wife.
That the power of the court to modify its orders providing for an allowance for the support of the wife made under SDC 14.0726 extends to installments which have accrued and are past due, is settled by Edith Rudd v. Frank Gerken, 67 S. D. 534, 295 N. W. 491. A court is justified in exercising its power to so modify its orders when changed conditions are established. Shoop v. Shoop, 58 S. D. 593, 237 N. W. 904; Vert v. Vert, 3 S. D. 619, 54 N. W. 655. In view of the remarriage of the former wife, and all of the facts and circumstances disclosed by the record in this case, we are unable 'to say that the learned trial court failed to exercise a sound judicial discretion in modifying its amended decree.
The order of the learned trial court is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
295 N.W. 493, 67 S.D. 537, 1940 S.D. LEXIS 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wenzel-v-wenzel-sd-1940.