Ellefson v. Ellefson
| Decision Date | 19 October 1921 |
| Citation | 184 N.W. 990,48 N.D. 415 |
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
An appeal from the District Court of Sargent county, Nuessle, J.
Decree affirmed.
Judgment affirmed. Respondent entitled to his costs and disbursements on appeal.
John A Jorgenson, for appellant.
John W Carr, for respondent.
This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the defendant to obtain a divorce on the ground of his incurable insanity.
The material facts are as follows: Plaintiff and defendant intermarried in Norway in 1886, and they afterward removed to the United States and located in Sargent county, N.D. To the marriage were born seven children, all of whom are living with the exception of two, and all are of legal age except one.
In 1888 the defendant purchased the tree-claim rights of a third party to the southwest quarter of section 14, township 132 north of range 55, in Sargent county, N.D., and filed on the same as a homestead. In 1892 defendant purchased on crop payment the northwest quarter of the same section and later made full payment of the purchase price and received title thereto. In 1901 defendant was committed from Sargent county to the hospital for the insane at Jamestown. He escaped from there and returned home, remaining there until January, 1903, when he was again committed to the said hospital, where he has ever since remained. It is claimed that his insanity is incurable.
Defendant was the owner of considerable personal property worth between $ 2,000 and $ 3,000, and $ 2,000 in cash at the time of the trial. The homestead of about 160 acres at this time was worth about $ 16,000, and the 160 acres which was purchased on contract was worth about $ 12,000. Plaintiff at this time also appeared to have between $ 2,000 and $ 3,000 in cash and Liberty Bonds in her name.
The trial court granted the plaintiff a divorce and decreed to her all of defendant's property with the exception of the 160 acres which had been purchased on contract and which had been fully paid for by the defendant. In short, the trial court awarded her approximately $ 20,000 and left in the name of the defendant the land above mentioned of the value of about $ 12,000.
The only error assigned on this appeal is the refusal of the trial court to transfer the whole of the property to plaintiff instead of leaving in his name the northwest quarter of section 14, township 132, range 55. In this we are clear there is no error. The same rule we think would be applicable here as on division of property in a divorce proceeding based upon other statutory grounds for divorce than that of insanity. The trial court made what it thought was a fair division of the property in all of the circumstances of the case.
It...
To continue reading
Request your trial