Court Opinion

ID: 9695417
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 18:19:08.860477+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:12.190840
License: Public Domain

BIEGELMEIER, Judge
(concurring). In concurring with the reversal as to the jurisdictional question, in Kusick v. Kusick, 243 Wis. 135, 9 N.W.2d 607, the Circuit Court of Marquette County had granted custody of children in a divorce action and later' the Circuit Court of Dane County entered orders with reference to their support. Holding the latter erroneous, the court said "Such interference by one circuit court with the judgment and exercise of power by another circuit court cannot be approved." No emergency existed which called for the interposition of the Circuit Court of Meade County to assure the children would be subject to the mandate of South Dakota courts.
The following aftermath deserves mention. The trial court wrote an opinion and two days later entered Findings, Conclusions and issued the Writ of Habeas Corpus. It gave custody of the children of a first marriage to applicant who was legally married' to a second husband and who was then living in a distant state with another man to whom she claimed to be married. Respondents stated on the record they intended to appeal *338and requested a stay which the trial court denied. The present whereabouts of applicant and the children are unknown. The trial court had power to grant a stay conditioned on prompt appeal or to require a bond from appellant to assure compliance with its orders in the event the children were removed from the state. Respondents may now find it difficult to enforce any relief granted by South Dakota courts, a contingency the trial court may have overlooked.