P. 1
ERBS Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law

ERBS Finding of Facts and Conclusions of Law

|Views: 425|Likes:
Published by tpepperman

More info:

Published by: tpepperman on Oct 29, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as ODT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





State of Wisconsin Jeffrey P. Erbs Petitioner vs.

Circuit Court Chippewa County Branch III

CASE NO. 10 FA 11 Mary Ann Erbs Respondent Petitioner Jeffrey P. Erbs Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law Comes now, Jeffrey P. Erbs upon Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, whereby it is found that: 1. Pamela Veith has been a Vexatious Litigator in these proceedings, whereby Judge Isaacson has found Probable Cause as required by John Doe Proceeding to forward motion of the District Attorney. 2. The parties were married in October of 2003. 3. Jeffrey P. Erbs is disabled, and was deemed so in 2002 (NEBF) then again in 2007 (SSDI) 4. Mary Ann Erbs is employed, full time. 5. Mary Ann Erbs is of the age to retire, whereby her Pension is now defined as Retirement, without ability to revert to another definition. 6. Jeffrey P. Erbs is fully disabled, and unable to work, as evidenced throughout the marriage. 7. It is not feasible that Jeffrey P. Erbs can ever become Self-Supporting, as evidence throughout the marriage, and throughout these proceedings. 8. Jeffrey P. Erbs has no Income. 9. Mary Ann Erbs knew of Jeffrey P. Erbs disability prior to the marriage, and, as per her testimony, and exhibits paid his rent on his home, prior to the marriage, establishing Maintainance, whereby there was never an expectation of reciprocation, or other compensation. 10. This court, finds no jurisdiction regarding Jeffrey P. Erbs pension moneys spent prior to the Divorce Petition, as this court has not found criteria to meet Disposal, having not been wasted, transferred, or otherwise unaccounted for. 11. Jeffrey and Mary Ann both agree that there were home improvements made, and that Mary Ann did not pay for them out of the M&I Account. 12. Jeffrey and Mary Ann filed their taxes, Married, filing Jointly up until, now. Mary Ann has always signed, and filed her taxes with Jeffrey allowing Knowledge of all moneys and expenditures. 13. As evidenced in these proceedings, Mary Ann did not submit a proposal, nor did she object to Jeffrey's whereby this court is to Presume she was in agreement to Jeffrey's proposal. The law does not allow Mary Ann to now, maintain that because she did not want certain items, wherein she made no claim to them, that she should otherwise be compensated for such gifts, nor should she maintain Reservation of Rights superior to Jeffrey's.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->