Hautala v. Hautala

Three separate issues are presented by the briefs, and I concur on Issues 1 and 2 as set forth by the majority opinion.

With respect to Issue 3, rehabilitative alimony, I respectfully dissent.

Per Finding of Fact 17, “[bjoth parties have engaged in a course of conduct during the course of the marriage causing the other party grievous mental suffering.” Per Conclusion of Law 7, both parties were entitled to a divorce.

Goehry v. Goehry, 354 N.W.2d 192 (S.D.1984), cited by the majority opinion, written by the author of this special writing, is not a rehabilitative alimony case. It does, however,…