Kennedy v. Kennedy

403 N.W.2d 892 (1987)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Kennedy v. Kennedy

Minnesota Court of Appeals
403 N.W.2d 892 (1987)

  • Written by Tammy Boggs, JD

Facts

In 1970, Duane Kennedy (defendant) and Carole Kennedy (plaintiff) married. The couple had four children, born in 1972, 1978, 1980, and 1984. Beginning in 1976, Duane practiced law. Carole was actively employed until 1977, after which she worked from home as a typist for two and a half years, then as a temporary secretary for six months in 1983. In the last five years of the Kennedys’ marriage, the family lived in a rural home in Grand Meadow. Both parents had good relationships with the three older children, who were happy and well adjusted in Grand Meadow. Although Carole had more of a traditional homemaking role, she had various professional and social pursuits that often took her out of the home. Duane was highly involved in the care of his children, particularly on weekday evenings and weekends. Carole acknowledged that, beginning in 1982, Duane took an increasingly greater role in caregiving. In 1984, the couple divorced. The three older children continued to live with Duane. Carole and the couple’s infant child moved to live with Carole’s father in Wisconsin. In 1984 and 1986, the trial court made custody-related findings and orders based on extensive trial evidence. The court found that Carole was the primary caregiver of the youngest child and that neither parent was the primary caregiver of the three older children. Based on considering the children’s best interests, the court placed the three older children in Duane’s physical custody and, on a temporary basis, the youngest child with Carole. The court awarded sole legal custody of the three older children to Duane. Carole appealed, primarily challenging the placement of the three older children with Duane.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Crippen, J.)

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 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership