Court Opinion

ID: 9514362
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:48:57.624496+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:16.660619
License: Public Domain

KONENKAMP, Justice
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
[¶ 31] I concur with the majority, except on its decision to remand for redetermination on the milk checks. I am unaware of any authority for such a ruling and Galen has supplied us with none. To say that a portion of the milk checks constituted income and is thus not divisible contravenes established law. “South Dakota is an ‘all property’ state. Under SDCL 25-4-44, all property of either or both divoi’cing spouses is subject to equitable division by the court, regardless of title or origin.” Radigan v. Radigan, 465 N.W.2d 483, 486 (S.D.1991). We should not attempt to fine tune a thorough and well-reasoned decision dividing marital assets. As the majority seems to acknowledge, in all other respects the court acted properly. To award Nancy a portion of the accumulated dairy operation income hardly seems an abuse of discretion, especially considering that Galen was awarded all the income producing property and almost two-thirds of all the marital property. Nancy only received 36% of the gross marital estate. I would affirm on all issues.
[¶ 32] SABERS, J., joins this special writing.