Logourl black
From our private database of 13,800+ case briefs...

Kulko v. Superior Court

United States Supreme Court
436 U.S. 84 (1978)


Facts

Sharon Kulko Horn (plaintiff) and Ezra Kulko (defendant) were residents of New York who married in California, in 1959, during a brief stopover as Kulko traveled to Korea for military duty. Upon the termination of Kulko’s military service, the couple lived together in New York for 13 years, during which time they had a son and a daughter. After separating, Horn moved to California. She returned briefly to New York, however, to sign a separation agreement in which the couple agreed to joint custody: the children would reside in New York during the school year and in California during summer and holiday vacations. Kulko was to pay $3,000 in child support annually to cover the periods during which the children resided with Horn. After entering the separation agreement, Horn traveled to Haiti and there obtained a divorce that incorporated the separation agreement. In 1973, the couple’s daughter sought to live with Horn during the school year. Kulko bought her a one-way ticket to California, and from then on, the girl spent the school year in California and vacations in New York. In 1976, the couple’s son told Horn he wanted to live in California as well. Horn bought him a plane ticket and he relocated. One month later, Horn moved a California court for recognition of the Haitian divorce decree as a California judgment, for full custody of the children, and for an increase in child support. Kulko challenged the court’s personal jurisdiction over him, but the court ruled that it could exercise jurisdiction based solely on Kulko’s act of sending the daughter to California. He appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

Holding and Reasoning (Marshall, 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, start your 7-day free trial of Quimbee for Law Students.

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 171,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,800 briefs, keyed to 187 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.