Koestler v. Pollard
Both statutes and public policy prohibit “heart balm” suits and claims for criminal conversation.
Caulfield v. Caulfield
Wife’s action on contract was triable to jury and, thus, she could commence separate action on note outside of divorce action.
Knafelc v. Dain Bosworth, Inc.
Complaint alleging husband committed securities fraud should not have been dismissed following divorce. Since the suit did not allege a cause of action for breach of good faith duty between spouses, wife is not precluded from bringing a separate civil action.
Dahlke v. Dahlke
A common law action for unjust enrichment cannot be litigated in a divorce action.
Leonard v. Lynn
Unjust enrichment claim affirmed for half of assets accumulated during cohabitation. It is not necessary for plaintiff to have a direct, income-producing effort.
Jahimiak v. Long
Trial court affirmed for finding that Long had financial interest in real estate, but reversed for awarding a judgment rather than ordering a partition, which was only remedy sought.
In Re Marriage of Washington v. Washington
Trial court can clarify ambiguous provision of divorce judgment without violating prohibition against modification Trial courts have authority to do all things “necessary and proper” to carry out its orders and judgments.
In Re Marriage of Jeffords v. Scott
Trial court properly modified judgment when a loan from husband to wife was discharged in bankruptcy, by relieving husband of his obligation for provide a QDRO which was a quid pro quo for repayment of the loan.
In Re Marriage of Hutjens. v. Hutjens
Amended judgment dividing retirement plan was not ambiguous. Given wife’s lack of action for 16 years, the interest of finality of judgments outweigh the interest in reopening the judgment.
Vander Perren v. Vander Perren
Motion to revise maintenance allows court to increase, reduce or terminate, even though the only motion before the court was to increase.