Kanter v. Kanter

CHAPMAN, Justice. Counsel for the parties litigant on this appeal have posed different questions based on the record for adjudication here. The testimony appearing in the transcript answers clearly each question propounded. As we study the record, the pivotal points of the controversy are disputed and in conflict, and our adjudications are controlling in the absence of a showing of abuse of discretion by the Chancellor below. Counsel for appellant contend that Lillyan Kanter was mentally competent to sign the property settlement dated April 6, 1946, and therefore the decree of divorce was erroneously set aside. Counsel for appellee answer the argument by stating that the conduct of the husband in obtaining the settlement was inequitable, smacked of fraud and was overreaching. There is testimony to support the contentions of each party litigant, but the Chancellor settled the issues.