Man Asked a U.S. Court to Settle His Custody Battle by Trial by Combat

David Ostrom, a 40-year-old man from Paola, Kansas, had reached his limit with the Iowa family court system. He and his ex-wife Bridgette had been locked in a bitter dispute over child custody and property taxes, and he felt her attorney, Matthew Hudson, had “destroyed him legally.”

So he filed a motion for trial by combat.

In a formal court filing to the Iowa District Court in Shelby County, Ostrom argued that trial by combat had never been explicitly banned or restricted as a right in the United States, and had been used as recently as 1818 in British courts. He cited a 2016 New York Supreme Court case in which a judge acknowledged that duels had not been abolished under state law, which is apparently what gave him the idea.

He challenged both Bridgette and her attorney Hudson to meet him on the field of battle, where he would, in his own words, “rend their souls from their corporeal bodies.” He offered Bridgette the option of having Hudson fight in her place, effectively inviting a 2v1 duel. He then asked the court for 12 weeks’ lead time to source or forge the necessary weapons: a katana and a wakizashi, traditional Japanese swords.

Hudson’s response was remarkably composed. He pointed out that while the US and Iowa constitutions do not specifically prohibit battling someone with a katana sword, a court sitting in equity is still prohibited from ordering such a thing. He also noted, with considerable understatement, that a duel ending in death would likely outweigh the property tax and custody issues at stake. He then asked the court to suspend Ostrom’s visitation rights and order him to undergo psychological evaluation.

The judge’s response was perhaps the most surprising part of all. He did not dismiss the motion outright. Instead, he said he would not be issuing a decision any time soon, citing irregularities in the filings from both sides.

He later ordered the psychological evaluation and temporarily suspended Ostrom’s unsupervised visitation rights. Ostrom said he met Hudson’s absurdity with his own absurdity, and vowed to request trial by combat for any future disputes that might arise.