SmartBrief
Confirm favorite deletion?
Conflict of Laws Keyed to Brilmayer
Kulko v. Superior Court
Citation:
436 U.S. 84 (1978)Facts
Plaintiff, Sharon Kulko Horn, and Defendant, Ezra Kulko, were New York domiciliaries who got married in 1959 during a brief stay in California. After returning to New York, they had two children together, Darwin and Ilsa. The family lived in New York until Sharon and Ezra separated in 1972. Sharon and the children then moved to California. Sharon briefly returned to New York so that she and Ezra could execute a separation agreement stating that Ezra would pay alimony and the children would remain with Ezra during the school year and visit Sharon on holidays. After signing the separation agreement in New York, Sharon flew to Haiti and secured a divorce decree that incorporated the terms of the separation agreement.
Both of the children expressed a desire to live in California with their mother. Ezra agreed, and purchased a one-way plane ticket for Ilsa, and later paid for Darwin to move. After both children were in California, Sharon brought a civil action against Ezra in California state court to establish the Haitian divorce as a California divorce and modify the judgment to award her with full custody of the children and increase Ezra’s child support obligation. Ezra was served under the California long-arm statute that allows state courts to assert jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution. Ezra challenged the court’s jurisdiction under the Due Process Clause. The California Supreme Court rejected Ezra’s argument, holding that jurisdiction was proper because he caused an effect in California by purposefully sending Ilsa to California.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.
Topic Resources