In Tyler v. Tyler, 624 P.2d 784 (Wyo. 1981), the husband and wife had entered an antenuptial agreement "which provided for separate ownership, enjoyment and disposal of their separate properties, whether acquired before or during their marriage." The Court stated the "general rule that when title to real property is taken in the name of both spouses and the consideration therefor is furnished by only one of them, there is a rebuttable presumption that a gift of one-half interest therein is intended for the other spouse . . ." and found sufficient evidence "to support the district court's finding that a gift of one-half of the property was intended and made by husband to wife." Id. at 785-86. In Tyler, 624 P.2d at 786-87, the husband similarly argued: that even if wife owned the property jointly with him, the district court abused its discretion in awarding one-half of the property to wife inasmuch as it was paid for entirely by husband, and that the spirit of the antenuptial agreement would be accomplished only by awarding all ownership of the property to husband. He points to 20-2-114, W.S. 1977 in support of his argument, stressing the direction therein that regard should be given to "the party through whom the property was acquired." The Court responded as follows: However, the element having to do with the party through which the property was acquired is only one of several elements set forth in the statute for consideration by the trial court. The other elements there set forth are to receive like consideration, e.g., condition in which the parties will be left by the divorce and merits of the parties. In the final analysis, the district court disposed of the interests of husband and wife in accordance with the antenuptial agreement (treating each party as owning one-half interest in the property). Husband retained his separate properties, and wife retained hers. . . . The district court did not here abuse its discretion. (Tyler, 624 P.2d at 787.)