Hansen v. Hansen

• Decision Date: 09 October 1951
• Citation: 259 Wis. 485,49 N.W.2d 434
• Parties: HANSEN, v. HANSEN.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Page 434

49 N.W.2d 434

259 Wis. 485

HANSEN, v. HANSEN.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Oct. 9, 1951.

James D'Amato, Robert T. McGraw, Waukesha, for appellant.

Jones & Petersen, Milwaukee, T. J. Regan, Milwaukee, of counsel, for respondent.

MARTIN, Justice.

The first question presented is whether the trial court abused its discretion in awarding defendant $8,000.00 in cash as a final division of an estate the net value of which was found to be $23,250.00, consisting of real estate, household furniture, two automobiles, a land contract and a promissory note.

The parties were married in 1932. There were six children at the time of trial.

The divorce was granted to the plaintiff husband on the ground of cruel and inhuman treatment by the defendant, consisting mainly of her association with other men.

It was undisputed that for about five years during the married life of the parties defendant worked at Allis Chalmers, earning during that period approximately $9,000.00. Her earnings, she testified, were spent for furnishing for the home, food for the family and clothing for herself and the children. The home of the parties was built by plaintiff, who was a carpenter contractor. Defendant helped in the actual construction, doing hard manual labor.

The allowance of approximately one-third of the value of the estate to the wife, particularly where the divorce is granted on the ground of her misconduct, may be said to be liberal, but it is clearly not an abuse of the court's discretion. In Gauger v. Gauger, 1914, 157 Wis. 630, 633, 147 N.W. 1075, 1077, the court said:

'There is no precise measure by which to determine the amount to be awarded to a divorced wife out of the subject for division.

'The nearest approach thereto is this: Except in some extraordinary circumstances, the maximum for the wife is one-half. That may be reduced to one-third or even less.'

The next question to be considered is that of support money.

Before commencement of the action, defendant had removed from the home of the parties, taking with her one of the children. Defendant was then pregnant.

After summons and complaint had been served the parties entered into a stipulation providing for custody of four children in the plaintiff and one child in the defendant. It further provided for payment of $125.00 monthly alimony and support money for defendant, payment of her impending lying-in expenses, and $250.00 for her attorney's fees.

The record discloses that plaintiff's income is about $6,000.00 per year.

Counsel contends that the support money award is excessive, and offers the argument that on the basis of $125.00 a month for the support of two children, $375.00 out of plaintiff's monthly income of $500.00 will be spent for the support of the six children. This leaves a balance of only $125.00 to plaintiff from which he must pay his other obligations. On the same basis, however, defendant will have no such balance left. Burdensome as the obligations of the plaintiff may be, his financial position is better than that of defendant.

It is necessary that both parties maintain a home for the children in their custody. Plaintiff was awarded the home of the parties and household furnishings, and it is presumed that defendant will have to spend all or most of her $8,000.00 cash allowance for a home for...