Blank v. Blank
Nebraska Supreme Court
930 N.W. 2d 523 (2019)

- Written by Kelli Lanski, JD
Facts
Marissa Blank (plaintiff) filed a motion for dissolution of her marriage to Caleb Blank (defendant) in February 2017. Her complaint asked that the court award joint custody of their children and attached a parenting plan signed by both parents and proposing that Marissa have legal custody. In May 2017, Caleb filed another parenting plan signed by both parents and proposing joint legal and physical custody of the children. Neither parenting plan was ever approved by the court. During the divorce-and-custody trial, Marissa asserted that she was the primary caregiver. Caleb testified that he worked outside the home more than Marissa but spent time with the children when not working and took charge of their care, including feeding and bathing them. At the time of the trial, both parents had entered into new relationships and were living with their new partners. At the trial, Marissa objected to joint custody on the basis of Caleb’s new relationship. Caleb asked for sole custody but also testified that he would be willing to work with and coparent with Marissa if the court determined that joint custody was in the best interests of the children. The court entered an order dissolving the marriage and awarding the parties joint legal and physical custody of their children. Marissa appealed, arguing that the court erred by awarding joint custody when neither party had requested it and that she was not on notice that joint custody was a possibility.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Funke, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.