The appellants challenged judgments awarding the respondent recovery on a counterclaim and an equalization payment arising from a family farm and matrimonial property dispute.
The court held that the evidence supported the findings that amounts advanced by the respondent were repayable and that the valuation of assets and equalization calculation were supported by the record.
The court rejected a late-raised unequal division argument because it had not been pleaded and was not disputed at trial.
The order directing payment from monies paid into court from the sale of the milk quota was also upheld.
