Presumption of Marital Property
Husband’s contention that property was held jointly because of an agreement between the parties that his property would be placed in joint tenancy solely for purposes of avoiding probate was insufficient to rebut the presumption that the property in joint tenancy was considered marital where the evidence indicated that the parties had established a pattern of ownership of individual and joint property prior to that time in which each party held title to their individual property in their own names and title to their joint property in joint tenancy. Brongel v. Brongel
Severance
An agreement between joint tenants to hold as tenants in common will sever an existing joint tenancy, and such an agreement may be inferred from the manner in which the parties deal with the property. Sebben v. Woodshank
Divorce
Where the court had jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter, it had jurisdiction to grant a divorce. Ward v. Sampson
Enforcement
A court does retain jurisdiction to enforce terms of its original divorce decree. Brickey v. Brickey
Equity
This Act does not enlarge the general equity powers of the court in divorce cases, but it does confer a limited power to make orders touching alimony and maintenance of the parties to make orders touching alimony and maintenance of the parties and the custody, care and support of children. Being a power specially conferred by statute, it cannot be extended beyond its terms to permit an alternation of the provisions of the decree relating to property rights. Brickey v. Brickey
