In Re Marriage of Herdt v. Herdt
Unequal division of property affirmed. Wife made more than husband. Court awarded husband his retirement in lieu of maintenance from wife. This was a proper exercise of discretion.
In Re Marriage of Prosser v. Cook
Unequal division affirmed due to relatively short marriage (8 years) where husband brought substantially all of the property into the marriage.
In Matter of Marriage of Sellers v. Sellers
Unequal division of property (75 – 25 in favor of wife) affirmed where wife brought some property into marriage and trial court concluded that husband had not been economically disadvantaged as a result of the marriage.
In Re Marriage of Hokin v. Hokin
Use of a coverture fraction to divide a retirement plan may be appropriate, but not in this case because the trial court considered the husband’s financial contributions to be greater than the wife’s contributions as homemaker and primary child caretaker.
In Re Marriage of LeMere v. LeMere
Trial court erred in deviating from an unequal division of the largest asset in the marital estate upon consideration of only one statutory factor, neglecting entirely the other statutory factors.
In Re Marriage of Dutchin v. Dutchin
While survivorship benefit is an asset, the trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion by determining that it would be unfair to divide it equally where the underlying pension was treated as an income stream rather than as an asset. Trial courts have a broad discretion in attempting to fashion the most equitable and fair result.
In Re Marriage of Steiner v. Steiner
Trial court did not err by treating husband’s sick leave account as an “other economic circumstance” justifying an unequal division of estate. Account had uncertain value, similar to an unvested stock option. While under Preiss, it cannot be divided because it does not have a fair market value, the court can still use it as a background consideration in determining an equitable property division.
In Re Marriage of Weiler v. Boerner
Trial court did not erroneously exercise its discretion by finding education debt was not marital and assigning it solely to wife, due to the enhanced education benefit.
Grumbeck v. Grumbeck
Though a circuit court may consider substantial gifted assets when dividing the marital estate, it may not divide the marital estate to work a de facto splitting of those assets when there is no hardship.
In re Marriage of Wheeler v. Wheeler
Unequal division of marital estate affirmed. Criminal activity clearly did not have anything to do with the break-up of the parties’ marriage and was therefore not marital misconduct prohibited from consideration. (Not published, but citable)