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

Pikula v. Pikula

Supreme Court of Minnesota
374 N.W.2d 705 (1985)


Facts

On March 29, 1980, Kelly Jo Pikula (plaintiff) and Dana David Pikula (defendant) were married. The Pikulas’ first daughter, Tiffany, was eight months old at the time of the Pikulas’ marriage. Shortly after, the Pikulas moved to Dana’s hometown, where they had frequent contact with Dana’s close-knit family. In 1981, Kelly had the couple’s second daughter, Tanisha. Kelly’s role was to care for the children and manage the home. Dana worked a split shift outside the home for his father’s trucking company. Kelly had a quick temper, and Dana suffered from chemical dependency, which led the couple to separate. While the Pikulas were awaiting a trial on their divorce, the Pikulas agreed to a joint-custody arrangement. Three professional social workers prepared reports for the trial judge, and all three recommended that custody be awarded to Kelly, with Dana having reasonable visitation with the children. However, the trial court found that Dana’s extended family was a strong, stable, and religious group, and that Kelly’s family was the opposite. Thus, the trial judge awarded custody to Dana. The court of appeals reversed the trial court and held that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding Dana custody. Dana 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 (Wahl, 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 175,000 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.