Missouri Court of Appeals
202 S.W.3d 72 (2006)
Cindy Vollet (plaintiff) and Kevin Vollet (defendant) were married and had three children. Cindy filed a petition for divorce, and she and Kevin were able to reach amicable resolutions regarding the partition of their assets and liabilities. Cindy and Kevin also agreed to a week-on/week-off joint-custody arrangement. Cindy and Kevin presented the custody agreement to the trial court for approval and included a non-cohabitation/overnight-guest-restriction provision, which Cindy and Kevin had both signed. Upon reviewing the provision, the trial judge rejected it. The trial judge reasoned that Cindy and Kevin should not have that type of control over one another’s lives following the divorce. The trial judge stated that he would not include a non-cohabitation/overnight-guest-restriction provision in this or any other judgment. Kevin appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Lowenstein, J.)
What to do next…
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.
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 220,000 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.