Wunsch v. Wunsch
| Decision Date | 20 November 1945 |
| Citation | 20 N.W.2d 545,248 Wis. 29 |
| Parties | WUNSCH v. WUNSCH. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County; William F. Shaughnessy, Judge.
Reversed.
Divorce. On September 26, 1944, judgment was entered in favor of the plaintiff, Walter L. Wunsch, granting him an absolute divorce from the defendant, Ethel M. Wunsch, and awarding temporary custody of the minor child of the parties under the supervision of the Department of Domestic Conciliation, for the period of next six months and until the further order of the court.
On May 24, 1945, upon motion of the defendant, the court made the following order:
‘That the judgment be and hereby is modified by striking therefrom the foregoing provision and to include in lieu thereof the following to-wit:
‘That the defendant is awarded the permanent custody of the minor child of the parties and until the further order of the Court.
‘Let this be entered at the foot of the original judgment and made a part thereof.'
The plaintiff appeals from the order of May 24, 1945.
Rubin, Zabel & Ruppa, of Milwaukee (William B. Rubin, of Milwaukee, of counsel), for appellant.
Charles Higgins, of Milwaukee (George A. Bowman, of Milwaukee, of counsel), for respondent.
We shall state only such facts as are necessary to an understanding of the conclusion which we have reached.
At the conclusion of the trial the court found, among other things, that the defendant ‘by her conduct has unsuited herself to have the custody of their minor child.
‘That time and time again she left him home with their child while she went out carousing and bumming in taverns and dance halls.
‘That between the months of March, 1944, and up to the time of this action, she has been associating herself with strange men in taverns, going to dance halls and has been on intimate terms with strangers, returning home in the wee hours of the morning, and on more than one occasion as late as 4 o'clock in the morning;’ and other facts of a similar nature.
Upon the hearing on defendant's motion to modify the judgment, the trial court made the following decision:
‘On the evidence received on this hearing and with the evidence submitted upon the trial of this action on the 22nd of September, 1944, in mind, and the Court having received the report of the Department of Domestic Conciliation, it is the order that the judgment in this case be modified to provide that the permanent custody and care of Diane Wunsch, the child of the parties, be and the same is reposed in the defendant until the further order of the Court, the payments...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Allen v. Allen
...(1976); Bahr v. Bahr, 72 Wis.2d 145, 240 N.W.2d 162 (1976); Kritzik v. Kritzik, 21 Wis.2d 442, 124 N.W.2d 581 (1963); Wunsch v. Wunsch, 248 Wis. 29, 20 N.W.2d 545 (1945). The report was fully disclosed to both parties. Both parties were given an opportunity to examine and respond to the rep......
-
Bahr v. Galonski
...the report does not become a part of the record of the court. Block v. Block (1960), 9 Wis.2d 378, 101 N.W.2d 101; Wunsch v. Wunsch (1945), 248 Wis. 29, 31, 20 N.W.2d 545. In discussing the holding of Wunsch, Konnak, in Survey of Wisconsin Domestic Relations Law, 1946-1953, 1954 Wis.L.R. 46......
-
Duro v. Duro
...v. Gilmore, 369 Mass. 598, 605, 341 N.E.2d 655 (1976); Fewel v. Fewel, 23 Cal.2d 431, 436, 144 P.2d 592 (1943); Wunsch v. Wunsch, 248 Wis. 29, 20 N.W.2d 545 (1945); Mazur v. Lazarus, 196 A.2d 477, 479 (D.C.1964). See also Foster & Freed, Child Custody (Part II), 39 N.Y.U.L.Rev. 615, 620 (19......
-
Rea v. Rea
...the jurisdiction of a chancellor has broad equitable powers. * * *' In Smith v. Smith, 209 Wis. 605, 245 N.W. 644, and Wunsch v. Wunsch, 248 Wis. 29, 20 N.W.2d 545, custody cases were reversed because the trial court had received the results of independent investigation which was not made a......