Legal Opinion

Kalbakken v. Kalbakken

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided October 8, 1929PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFowler, J.

It is quite apparent that the county judge gave-to the case careful consideration and that his findings of fact are sustained by the evidence. It also appears that his division of the husband’s estate is well within the general rule as stated in Varney v. Varney, 58 Wis. 19, 16 N. W. 36; Edleman v. Edleman, 125 Wis. 270, 104 N. W. 56; Hiecke v. Hiecke, 163 Wis. 171, 157 N. W. 747; and Bruhn v. Bruhn, 197 Wis. 358, 222 N. W. 242, unless, as matter of law, interest on the amount of the wife’s loan as well as the principal should have been deducted from the gross estate of the husband to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hiecke v. HieckeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1916
  2. Bruhn v. BruhnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  3. Edleman v. EdlemanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Pauly v. PaulyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
  5. Varney v. VarneyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1883

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Crawford v. CrawfordWyoming Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Steinbach v. SteinbachWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Yasulis v. YasulisWisconsin Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Polak v. PolakWisconsin Supreme Court · 1946

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API