Fox v. Fox , 1991 S.D. LEXIS 53 ( 1991 )

MORGAN, Retired Justice

(concurring in part and dissenting in part).

I dissent from the reversal and remand on the issue of the combined effect of the property division and the permanent alimony. The majority finds that this is some kind of double compensation to the wife. But this is precisely the kind of error that could have been and should have been called to the trial court’s attention by properly filed objections to the wife’s proposed findings and conclusions. Now husband would have us “fine tune” the trial court’s decision when he did not give the trial court the opportunity. I would affirm the trial court decision all of the way. I agree on the allowance of the appellate attorney fees.

I am authorized to state that Chief Justice MILLER joins in this concurrence in part and dissent in part.