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

The Klemms decided to divorce, and Gail (W) filed for a divorce in pro per. At the dissolution hearing, attorney Catherine Bailey appeared for W. Bailey was a friend of both Dale (H) and W and because they could not afford an attorney, Bailey appeared without compensation. They agreed upon joint custody of their minor children to be split be two-week periods, and W waived child support. The trial judge granted the decree and awarded what was asked for but W was receiving AFDC payments, and the Family Support Division got involved and filed a written objection to the recommendation that H not be required to pay child support. Everyone appeared that a hearing to discuss that matter and Bailey represented that she was appearing for H. No written consents of joint representation were made between the parties. W testified in a confusing manner about whether Bailey's representation of H was permitted. The matter was continued, and the parties came back again, and written consents were filed by Bailey. The court denied the motion, and then H and W petitioned the court to permit such representation.

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

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

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