The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

H and W were married in 1972. In 2000, W discovered that H was romantically involved with another woman. H wanted the marriage to continue and was willing to make substantial promises regarding his future behavior in order to achieve reconciliation. Some of the promises were reduced to writing and signed by both spouses on May 29. H agreed to pay $2600 a month for household expenses, to maintain life insurance, retirement accounts, and family health insurance, to provide for the college expenses of their youngest daughter, and to pay one-half of all future retirement payments to W if his indiscretions resulted in the dissolution of the marriage. The agreement was signed and notarized by both parties. In summer 2005, H leased an apartment, gathered his belongings, and left the family residence without advising W of his plans. After a bit of detective work, W confronted H at his new apartment. H admitted that he had continued his prior affair. W filed for divorce in September 2005. At trial, W offered, and the court admitted cellular phone records of H and his alleged paramour showing hundreds of phone conversations and intimate messages. The district court found that the terms of the reconciliation agreement, though generous to W, were not unconscionable and that H's continuance of the affair triggered the terms of the reconciliation agreement. The final court order closely tracked the reconciliation agreement. H appealed.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.