# Kilmer v. Kilmer

> Wisconsin Supreme Court · May 22, 1946 · 249 Wis. 41

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4010512

## Case

- **Full name:** Kilmer, Respondent, vs. Kilmer, Appellant
- **Court:** Wisconsin Supreme Court
- **Decided:** May 22, 1946
- **Citations:** 249 Wis. 41; 23 N.W.2d 510; 1946 Wisc. LEXIS 292
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by RectoR
- **Judges:** Rector, Fairchild, Rosenberry
- **Cited by:** 8 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4010512

## Opinion text

RectoR, J.
{dissenting).
I do not believe there was “sufficient cause shown” within sec. 247.37 (2), Stats., for vacating the judgment of divorce. Generally speaking, a decree ought not to be set aside except upon a showing of grounds which would indicate that it should not have been granted in the first instance. There is at least one exception to that rule and there may be others. Such an exception would exist if the parties were to become reconciled after the decree. However, there is no basis for an exception in the present case. No question exists but that the divorce was properly granted in the first instance. It seems illogical for the trial court to vacate the decree and reinstate the marriage relation on the ground that reconciliation has become impossible.
I am authorized to say that Mr. Justice Wickhem concurs in this dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4010512. Public record. Not legal advice.