Kansas man requests 'trial by combat' sword fight to settle legal dispute with ex-wife

vt-author-image

By VT

Article saved!Article saved!

A Kansas man has requested a "trial by combat" sword fight to settle a legal dispute with his ex-wife.

The bizarre request was filed on January 3 by David Ostrom, 40, of Paola, Kansas, as per the Guardian. He claimed that his ex-wife Bridgette Ostrom, 38, of Harlan, Iowa, had hired an attorney, Matthew Hudson, who had "destroyed [him] legally."

But is fighting ever the answer? This girl pummeled a bully after she started a fight: 
[[jwplayerwidget||https://content.jwplatform.com/videos/Fupzdvr7-dkXnENEs.mp4||Fupzdvr7]]

David Ostrom said the judge could allow him and his ex-wife to "resolve our disputes on the field of battle, legally," adding that trial by combat "has never been explicitly banned or restricted as a right in these United States."

As part of the request, Ostrom said that he required 12 weeks to obtain Japanese samurai swords.

The former couple has been wrapped up in bitter disputes over custody and visitation issues pertaining to their children and property tax payments.

Japanese samurai swords.
[[imagecaption|| Credit: PA Images]]

As per The Des Moines Register, Ostrom said that he had decided on such unusual and extreme action because of frustrations caused by his ex-wife's attorney.

"I think I've met Mr. Hudson's absurdity with my own absurdity," Ostrom said, adding that his ex-wife would choose him as her champion in a trial by combat.

Hudson said the risk of a duel resulting in death meant that "such ramifications likely outweigh those of property tax and custody issues." He, therefore, requested the judge to reject David Ostrom's request for trial by combat.

[[imagecaption|| Credit: Pexels]]

In a filing made on Monday, Judge Craig Dreismeier said a decision would not be reached any time soon because of irregularities with both parties' motions and responses.

"Until the proper procedural steps to initiate a court proceeding are followed, this court will take no further action concerning any motion, objection or petition filed by either party at this time," the judge said.

Kansas man requests 'trial by combat' sword fight to settle legal dispute with ex-wife

vt-author-image

By VT

Article saved!Article saved!

A Kansas man has requested a "trial by combat" sword fight to settle a legal dispute with his ex-wife.

The bizarre request was filed on January 3 by David Ostrom, 40, of Paola, Kansas, as per the Guardian. He claimed that his ex-wife Bridgette Ostrom, 38, of Harlan, Iowa, had hired an attorney, Matthew Hudson, who had "destroyed [him] legally."

But is fighting ever the answer? This girl pummeled a bully after she started a fight: 
[[jwplayerwidget||https://content.jwplatform.com/videos/Fupzdvr7-dkXnENEs.mp4||Fupzdvr7]]

David Ostrom said the judge could allow him and his ex-wife to "resolve our disputes on the field of battle, legally," adding that trial by combat "has never been explicitly banned or restricted as a right in these United States."

As part of the request, Ostrom said that he required 12 weeks to obtain Japanese samurai swords.

The former couple has been wrapped up in bitter disputes over custody and visitation issues pertaining to their children and property tax payments.

Japanese samurai swords.
[[imagecaption|| Credit: PA Images]]

As per The Des Moines Register, Ostrom said that he had decided on such unusual and extreme action because of frustrations caused by his ex-wife's attorney.

"I think I've met Mr. Hudson's absurdity with my own absurdity," Ostrom said, adding that his ex-wife would choose him as her champion in a trial by combat.

Hudson said the risk of a duel resulting in death meant that "such ramifications likely outweigh those of property tax and custody issues." He, therefore, requested the judge to reject David Ostrom's request for trial by combat.

[[imagecaption|| Credit: Pexels]]

In a filing made on Monday, Judge Craig Dreismeier said a decision would not be reached any time soon because of irregularities with both parties' motions and responses.

"Until the proper procedural steps to initiate a court proceeding are followed, this court will take no further action concerning any motion, objection or petition filed by either party at this time," the judge said.