Legal Opinion

Steinbach v. Steinbach

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided December 3, 1929PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFowler, J.

No definite rule can be laid down to guide trial courts in dividing the husband’s estate between the parties on final division upon the granting of a divorce. The learned trial judge seems to have assumed that the wife is always entitled to some definite proportion, and that under the circumstances here involved she should receive at least one sixth. This is an erroneous conception. The division is not a problem in fractions. In every case all the circumstances must be considered, including the separate estate of the wife. The question always is, What should the wife receive, under the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bruhn v. BruhnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1928
  2. Kalbakken v. KalbakkenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Kronforst v. KronforstWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Dresser v. DresserSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
  3. Cudahy v. CudahyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Crawford v. CrawfordWyoming Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Voegeli v. VoegeliWisconsin Supreme Court · 1931

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API