Case Name: Christine E. Whitcomb v. Wayne W. Whitcomb, Sr.
Court: Vermont Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Vermont
Decision Date: 1979-02-06
Citations: 137 Vt. 11
Docket Number: No. 10-78
Parties: Christine E. Whitcomb v. Wayne W. Whitcomb, Sr.
Judges: Present: Barney, C.J., Daley, Larrow, Billings and Hill, JJ.
Reporter: Vermont Reports
Volume: 137
Pages: 11–12

Head Matter:
Christine E. Whitcomb v. Wayne W. Whitcomb, Sr.
[398 A.2d 305]
No. 10-78
Present: Barney, C.J., Daley, Larrow, Billings and Hill, JJ.
Opinion Filed February 6, 1979
Paterson, Gibson & Noble, Montpelier, for Plaintiff.
Averill Laundon, Waterbury, for Defendant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Both plaintiff and defendant sought a divorce in the Washington Superior Court. After a contested hearing, the trial court granted the plaintiff a decree of divorce. The defend ant appeals, asserting that the court abused its discretion in its decree concerning the division of property between the parties.
15 V.S.A. § 751 provides that the court shall:
decree such disposition of the property owned by the parties separately, jointly, or by the entirety, as shall appear just and equitable, having regard to the respective merits of the parties, to the condition in which they shall be left by such divorce, [and] to the party through whom the property was acquired .
The statute confers upon the court a great degree of discretion. Unless it appears on review that such discretion has been withheld, abused, or exercised on grounds clearly untenable or to an extent clearly unreasonable, the decree must stand. Sweeney v. Sweeney, 136 Vt. 199, 388 A.2d 388 (1978); Peisch v. Peisch, 132 Vt. 514, 321 A.2d 67 (1974). On the record before us none of these infirmities appear.
Judgment affirmed.