For Your Data Watts V. Watts Illustration Brief
January 22, 2002
Edit
Watts v. Watts illustration brief summary
405 N.W.2d 303 (Wis. 1987)
CASE FACTS
The parties' had a 12-year nonmarital cohabitation human relationship which produced ii children.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The judgment that dismissed the female's activeness against the manful somebody for an accounting together with a part of the personal together with describe organisation assets accumulated during the parties' single cohabitation human relationship was reversed. The woman somebody stated a claim for which relief could last granted together with her claim could residuum on contract, unjust enrichment, or partition grounds.
Recommended Supplements together with Study Aids for Property Law
405 N.W.2d 303 (Wis. 1987)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiff woman somebody cohabitant sought review of a judgment entered past times the Circuit Court of Dane County, Wisconsin, that dismissed her activeness against accused manful somebody cohabitant for failure to Blue Planet a claim. The woman somebody asserted diverse theories to back upward her alleged entitlement to an accounting together with a part of the male's accumulated personal together with describe organisation assets.CASE FACTS
The parties' had a 12-year nonmarital cohabitation human relationship which produced ii children.
DISCUSSION
- The courtroom held that the woman somebody stated a claim upon which relief could last granted that could residuum on a contract, unjust enrichment, or partition theory.
- Neither the Wisconsin Family Code nor world policy precluded the woman somebody from asserting an limited or implied contractual correct to part belongings accumulated through the parties' articulation efforts. The woman somebody could enhance an unjust enrichment claim inwards thought of the male's alleged unreasonable memory of the parties' jointly acquired property.
- Facts close the parties' describe organisation partnership, articulation belongings purchases, together with the female's uncompensated abode together with describe organisation contributions stated a partition claim, which was a proper crusade of activeness inwards marital cohabitation cases.
- The woman somebody did non Blue Planet a claim for belongings partition nether §767.255 because the parties together with their children were non a "family" inside the pregnant of the statute, which was non intended to extend to single cohabitants.
- The doctrine of "marriage past times estoppel" did non apply because the parties' send could non house them inside the orbit of § 767.255, which was non intended for their benefit.
CONCLUSION
The judgment that dismissed the female's activeness against the manful somebody for an accounting together with a part of the personal together with describe organisation assets accumulated during the parties' single cohabitation human relationship was reversed. The woman somebody stated a claim for which relief could last granted together with her claim could residuum on contract, unjust enrichment, or partition grounds.
Recommended Supplements together with Study Aids for Property Law