Court Opinion

ID: 9713552
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 05:17:22.128954+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:19.255146
License: Public Domain

HENDERSON, Justice
(specially concurring).
Although I agree with this decision for the principal reason that some of the marriage-accumulated assets were not on the table for division, I wish to point out that I do not believe the appellant should share in the $215,000 constituting assets that appel-lee brought into the marriage. This Court only considers the contributions made by each party during the marriage to the acquisition or accumulation of the marital estate. As I review our recent cases on division of property in divorce cases, it appears that we have not deviated from this rule. See Vaughn v. Vaughn, 252 N.W.2d 910 (S.D.1977); Hanson v. Hanson, 252 N.W.2d 907 (S.D.1977).