Marriage of Bouchard v. Bouchard
Trial court has discretion to determine appropriate discount rate in order to value a pension.
Marriage of Arneson v. Arneson
Pension should not be valued on basis of continued employment to age 65 because that is based on assumption husband would keep working and credit the wife with his post-divorce employment.
Peterson v. Peterson
No value for pension where odds of ever collecting it were speculative and improbable.
Ashraf v. Ashraf
Where there was affirmative, uncontradicted, expert testimony of tax rate on retirement plans, trial court must either accept it or explain why it found the testimony improbable or the witness discredited.
In Re Marriage of Kennedy v. Kennedy
When court uses QDRO to divide a pension, present value of the parties’ interests is irrelevant to the property division.
In Re Marriage of Ably v. Ably
Trial court fairly treated pension plans by comparing monthly benefits of husband’s plan and wife’s plan, rather than finding present value of each plan.
Hooker v. Hooker
Where action was properly started for separation from room and board, amendment to divorce after residency was fulfilled was proper.
Siemering v. Siemering
If no jurisdiction existed due to lack of residency at time of commencement, defect cannot be corrected by amending at a later date when residency requirement is fulfilled.
Artis-Wergin v. Artis-Wergin
(1) Finding of residency affirmed based upon statement that wife intended to make Wisconsin her permanent residence, filed tax returns, maintained a Wisconsin driver’s license and bank accounts.
Bank of Two Rivers v. Zimmer
Failure to respond constitutes admission of all material facts, even if they were denied in the pleadings. The request need not be limited to facts, but may seek opinions of facts or of application of law to facts.