Weigel v. Weigel

Docket Number20140412
Decision Date01 December 2015
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
9 cases
  • Innis-Smith v. Smith
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • January 26, 2018
    ...valued at the time of trial. See, e.g. , Langwald v. Langwald , 2016 ND 81, ¶ 10, 878 N.W.2d 71 ; Weigel v. Weigel , 2015 ND 270, ¶ 9, 871 N.W.2d 810 ; Conzemius v. Conzemius , 2014 ND 5, ¶ 27, 841 N.W.2d 716. This Court has been consistent in its determination that "[c]ommon sense dictates......
  • Brew v. Brew
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • October 17, 2017
    ...rather, an equitable property distribution is based on the particular circumstances of each case." Weigel v. Weigel, 2015 ND 270, ¶ 10, 871 N.W.2d 810. Economic fault and dissipation of assets are relevant factors the court may consider and are grounds for an unequal distribution. Allmon, 2......
  • Werven v. Werven
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • March 15, 2016
    ...All property owned by either party, whether jointly or individually, is considered marital property. Weigel v. Weigel, 2015 ND 270, ¶ 9, 871 N.W.2d 810. As a corollary, property not owned by either party is not marital property. In cases where one spouse owns an interest in a corporation or......
  • Berdahl v. Berdahl
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • July 8, 2022
    ...allow a district court to consider the parties’ conduct during marriage, including fault. Weigel v. Weigel , 2015 ND 270, ¶ 22, 871 N.W.2d 810. The court may properly consider both economic and non-economic fault in dividing marital property. Amsbaugh , 2004 ND 11, ¶ 34, 673 N.W.2d 601. "Ec......
  • Get Started for Free