Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

In re Marriage of Shanks

Supreme Court of Iowa
758 N.W.2d 506 (2008)


Facts

Randall Shanks (plaintiff), an attorney, and Teresa Shanks (defendant), a college graduate who had worked in Mr. Shanks’ legal office, married in April 1998. Each had children from a previous marriage. Mr. Shanks made entering into a prenuptial agreement a condition of the marriage. He drafted and presented an agreement to Teresa 10 days before their wedding, and he recommended that she obtain independent legal advice regarding its terms. The intent of the agreement was to maintain the parties’ financial positions as of the time of the marriage. This provided Mr. Shanks more financial protection given his higher wealth, but the agreement did provide certain benefits to Mrs. Shanks such as a percentage of proceeds in the sale of their house and an interest in her husband’s life insurance and law practice in the event of his death. The agreement disclosed the parties’ financial positions. It also waived Mrs. Shanks’ right to alimony. She had the agreement reviewed by a Nebraska attorney who made a few comments and recommended that Mrs. Shanks seek Iowa counsel. She did not. She signed the agreement five days before the marriage. Six years later, the couple entered divorce proceedings. Mr. Shanks filed a claim to enforce the premarital agreement, which Mrs. Shanks opposed. The trial court ruled in favor of Mrs. Shanks. Mr. Shanks appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Hecht, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 204,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.