In Re Marriage of Halko v. Halko
While a trial court has authority to dismiss a UIFSA action for discovery violations, the law requires a finding of egregious conduct by the violating party as a prerequisite to the severe penalty of dismissal.
Parker v. Wisconsin Patients Comp. Fund
Trial court properly exercised discretion is allowing defendant to add an expert witness after the deadline. The excusable neglect standard of §801.15(2) does not apply to untimely motions to enlarge scheduling orders deadlines. Rather, Wis. Stats. §802.10 applies.
Luckeett v. Bodner
Trial court erroneously exercised its discretion by not permitting withdrawal of admissions when party failed to respond to the requests where merits would be served by withdrawal and the other parties would not be prejudiced.
Articles on Discounts
Articles and resources related to discount issues in divorce cases.
Marriage of Arneson v. Arneson
25% discount for minority interest and lack of marketability affirmed.
In Re Marriage of Liddle v. Liddle
Discount for lack of control was proper.
In Re Marriage of Popp v. Popp
Husband’s testimony alone insufficient to warrant discount factor for nonmarketability and minority position. Expert opinion needed.
In Re Marriage of Schorer v. Schorer
Accepting Bonfield’s valuation of canning business not clearly erroneous. Bonfield used a 20% premium because of husband’s controlling interest and a 20% discount for reduced marketability.
Leighton v. Leighton
Compensation for bodily impairment is not divisible property.
Pfeil v. Pfeil
Military retirement benefits based on physical disability are not divisible assets in divorce.