KEHL v. BRITZMAN


258 Wis. 513 (1951)

KEHL, Respondent, vs. BRITZMAN, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

March 6, 1951.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

For the appellant there was a brief by Randolph R. Conners and Frederick F. Hillyer, both of Madison, and oral argument by Mr. Hillyer.

For the respondent there was a brief by George A. Hartman and Leo C. Hartman, both of Juneau, and oral argument by Leo C. Hartman.


FAIRCHILD, J.

Had the fact of condonation and that the parties were continuing to live together as husband and wife during the pendency of the divorce proceedings been presented timely to the court, judgment of divorce would not have been granted.

In appellant's counterclaim there is in effect admission that he was served with a summons and complaint in the divorce action; that he accompanied his wife to the office of her attorney; that he entered into a stipulation...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases