Connection lost
Server error
Marriage of Little v. Little Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A father quit his Air Force job to attend law school and sought to reduce his child support. The court denied the reduction, establishing a balancing test that prioritizes the children’s best interests over the parent’s career ambitions.
Legal Significance: This case rejects the “good faith” test for modifying child support based on voluntary income reduction. It establishes a multi-factor balancing test in Arizona, prioritizing the child’s best interests and the parent’s primary obligation of support over the parent’s personal or career goals.
Marriage of Little v. Little Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Billy L. Little, Jr. (Appellant), an Air Force lieutenant earning $48,000 annually, was ordered to pay $1,186 per month in child support for his two children following his divorce. Nine months after the divorce decree, Appellant voluntarily resigned his commission and enrolled full-time at Arizona State University College of Law. He then petitioned the court to modify his child support obligation, requesting a reduction to $239 per month based on his new status as a student. The trial court denied the request for a significant reduction, finding that Appellant’s decision was voluntary, made to further his own ambition without considering his children’s needs, and would be to their detriment. The court did grant a minor reduction to $972 per month based on the custodial mother’s increased income. The court of appeals reversed, applying a “good faith” test and finding Appellant’s decision reasonable. The Arizona Supreme Court granted review to determine the proper standard for modification based on a voluntary career change to pursue education.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: What legal standard should a court apply when determining whether a parent’s voluntary decision to leave employment to pursue higher education constitutes a substantial and continuing change of circumstances sufficient to warrant a downward modification of a child support obligation?
The trial court’s refusal to grant a downward modification is affirmed. A Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
What legal standard should a court apply when determining whether a parent’s voluntary decision to leave employment to pursue higher education constitutes a substantial and continuing change of circumstances sufficient to warrant a downward modification of a child support obligation?
Conclusion
The case establishes a child-centric balancing test for modification requests based on Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in re
Legal Rule
A court must apply a multi-factor balancing test to determine whether a Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor si
Legal Analysis
The Arizona Supreme Court rejected both the "good faith" test and the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incidi
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The court rejected the “good faith” test for modifying child support