Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Metcalf v. Metcalf

Supreme Court of Nebraska
769 N.W.2d 386 (2009)


Facts

Rita Jo Metcalf (defendant) and Kenneth Metcalf (plaintiff) divorced in 1999. Upon divorce, Kenneth was ordered to pay Rita $2,000 per month in alimony for 120 months. Six years later, Kenneth filed a motion for reduction of his alimony obligation. Kenneth alleged that circumstances had changed, because his salary had decreased and Rita’s salary had increased. Following a hearing, the trial court denied his motion. Kenneth did not file an appeal. Two months later, Kenneth filed another motion for reduction of his alimony obligation. The evidence produced at the second hearing made it clear that both Rita and Kenneth were experiencing some degree of financial difficulty. Kenneth could not afford health insurance, had cashed in his retirement account, and had filed for bankruptcy. Rita had entered into various business endeavors and testified that she relied upon Kenneth’s alimony payments when entering those contracts. The trial court denied Kenneth’s second motion for failure to show a material change in circumstances. In making its decision, the trial court considered only the evidence related to the two months between the denial of Kenneth’s first motion and the filing of his second motion. Kenneth appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed. Kenneth appealed again.

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 (McCormack, 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 217,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.