Kraemer v. Traun, 2025 WI App 8: Trial court properly exercised discretion in deviating from an equal division of estate by assigned student debt to husband by considering the fact that he would be the only one to benefit from his increased earning capacity post-divorce, his use of marital assets to invest in day trading…
Trial court properly excluded contingent liabilities.
(1) Debts incurred after start of action do not reduce the marital estate. (2) College expenses for children over 18 is not a joint marital debt.
Trial court is powerless to order husband’s name removed from the mortgage.
Where husband paid $75,000 to parents just before commencement of divorce action, $30,000 was proper repayment of loan, but trial court properly found that the $45,000 in interest should be returned to the marital estate. No abuse of discretion in not ordering interest on the $45,000 for the time it was in husband’s parent’s possession.
Exclusion of contingent liabilities affirmed.
Failure of bank to give notice to wife that husband took out loan during marriage does not prevent bank from collecting from wife after husband’s death.
Finding that debt to husband’s mother to start business was marital is affirmed. If business had made a profit, it would have been part of the marital estate, so debt to enter into failed business was marital.
Medical care for ex-husband falls within category of necessaries and ex-wife is equally responsible for medical expenses incurred during marriage, despite hold harmless in divorce decree.
Medical treatment is a duty of support under sec. 765.001(2). Husband cannot avoid this obligation because he was not domiciled in Wisconsin after applicability of WUMPA.