Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re the Adoption of Reinius

Washington Supreme Court

Decided November 19, 1959No. 34589Published

1DissentOtt, J.

(dissenting)—I dissent for the following reasons: (1) Appellant assigns error to that portion of the trial court’s finding of fact No. 3 (relating to the fitness of the respondents) which states “that said petitioners are fully able and qualified to support and care for said children,” and also to the following portion of finding of fact No. 4: “that petitioners, Howard Pelland and Edythe Pelland are proper persons for the adoption of said minor children.”

In an adoption proceeding, the determination of the parental fitness of adoptive parents is a factual one. Each of the respondents was a…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Senior Citizens League, Inc. v. Department of Social SecurityWashington Supreme Court · 1951
  2. State Ex Rel. Clark v. HoganWashington Supreme Court · 1956
  3. Wise v. FardenWashington Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Casco Co. v. Public Utility District No. 1Washington Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Wenzler & Ward Plumbing & Heating Co. v. SellenWashington Supreme Court · 1958

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API