The Wisconsin Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court's ruling in the case of Delaine Brian Laski v. Jennifer Rene Laski, affirming the divorce judgment and denying Jennifer's requests for modifications to property division and maintenance. This decision impacts both parties, particularly Jennifer, who sought changes based on claims of financial hardship and attorney negligence.

The appeal, filed under docket number 2025AP001411, stemmed from a divorce proceeding initiated by Delaine in March 2023. The couple, who share a minor child, reached partial agreements regarding custody and property division. However, disputes arose during the contested divorce hearing, particularly concerning the division of marital property and maintenance awards.

In September 2024, the Douglas County Circuit Court ordered an equal division of the marital property and awarded Jennifer $400 per month in maintenance until their child graduates from high school. Jennifer contested the court's classification of certain properties and the maintenance amount. After the divorce judgment was finalized in October 2024, she filed a motion in June 2025 seeking to modify the terms, citing a substantial change in circumstances.

The court ruled that the property in question, located in Gordon, Wisconsin, was marital property because it had been refinanced to purchase interests from Jennifer's siblings. Jennifer's request for an individual award of an $80,000 interest in that property was denied. The court also noted that Jennifer's maintenance request of $800 per month was not justified, as her financial circumstances had improved since the divorce.

Judge George L. Glonek presided over the original case and the appeals decision was made by a panel including Judges Stark, Hruz, and Gill. The court's opinion stated, "Jennifer fails to explain how Delaine’s updated financial status would entitle her to relief under WIS. STAT. § 806.07." This indicates that the court found no substantial evidence to support Jennifer's claims for modification.

In her appeal, Jennifer argued that the circuit court erred in its decisions regarding the property division, maintenance, and the return of personal property. However, the court found that many of her claims were untimely or inadequately supported. The court noted that Jennifer's financial situation had actually improved since the divorce, making her claims for increased maintenance unfounded.

The court's ruling emphasized that modifications to property division in divorce cases are not typically allowed unless there is a significant change in circumstances. Jennifer's arguments regarding her attorney's performance were also dismissed, as the court stated that attorney neglect does not constitute a valid reason for relief.

This ruling sets a precedent for similar cases where one party seeks to modify divorce terms based on claims of financial hardship or attorney negligence. It underscores the importance of timely appeals and the burden of proof required to demonstrate substantial changes in circumstances.

Looking ahead, Jennifer may consider filing a petition for review with the Wisconsin Supreme Court, as the court's decision is subject to further review. However, no related cases are currently pending that would affect this ruling.