Pleasnick v. Pleasnick

• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: CLAY, J.
• Citation: Pleasnick v. Pleasnick, 215 Ky. 281, 284 S.W. 1070 (Ky. Ct. App. 1926)
• Decision Date: 22 June 1926
• Parties: PLEASNICK v. PLEASNICK.

284 S.W. 1070

215 Ky. 281

PLEASNICK v. PLEASNICK.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

June 22, 1926

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pike County.

Divorce action between Eva E. Pleasnick and Joseph Pleasnick. From the judgment granting a divorce and permitting the first-named party to retain the title to a piece of real estate conveyed to her, the latter appeals. Affirmed.

J. C Cantrell, of Stone, for appellant.

W. G W. Riddle, of Tolin, for appellee.

CLAY J.

Eva E Pleasnick was granted a divorce from Joseph Pleasnick and permitted to retain title to a piece of real estate which had been conveyed to her. Joseph appeals.

While we are without power to reverse the decree of divorce, we may review the case and determine whether the property rights of the parties were properly adjusted. Maynard v. Maynard, 145 Ky. 197, 140 S.W. 156. It appears from the evidence that the parties have twelve children. All of them are under age, and ten of them live with their mother. Appellant sells meats and groceries. At one time he was quite prosperous, but within the last few years he has contracted the habit of drunkenness, and has been wasting his estate, until he now has on hand only a small stock of goods. On a few occasions he has treated his wife in a cruel and inhuman manner. There can be no doubt that the grounds of divorce were fully sustained, and that the wife was entitled to alimony. It appears, however, that the parties purchased and improved the piece of real estate, and that the title thereto was put in the name of the wife. To say the least, the evidence justifies the conclusion that the wife contributed as much as the husband to the purchase and improvement of the property. In explaining why the title was put in her name, appellant says:

"She said, if I let you have the few hundred dollars I have to put in that house, you will have to put it in my name."

On this showing the wife was denied alimony, but adjudged the real property. She was also awarded the custody of the children, "to be supported by her."

Appellant relies on the statute providing that:

"Every judgment for a divorce from the bond of matrimony shall contain an order restoring any property not disposed of at the commencement of the action, which either party may have obtained, directly or indirectly, from or through the other, during marriage, in consideration or by reason thereof" (Civ. Code Prac. § 425 [Kentucky Statutes, §

...