Legal Opinion · Dissent

Constant A. v. Paul C.A.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 14, 1985No. 2293Published

1DissentBeck, Judge

I respectfully dissent. In the context of partial custody, I would hold that a parent’s homosexuality is a relevant consideration if it can be shown that the parent’s homosexual behavior adversely affects the child(ren) in question.

It is important to recognize that the question before the court is limited to expanded partial custody. The majority does not recognize this limitation and writes without distinguishing standards for shared custody, sole custody and partial custody. At 52-54. The mother-appellant in the case sub judice is not requesting shared custody, sole custody or unrestricted…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Edelman v. JordanSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Wiegand v. WiegandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  3. Commonwealth Ex Rel. Spriggs v. CarsonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1977
  4. Doe v. Commonwealth's Attorney for RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Doe v. Commonwealth's Atty. for City of RichmondDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1975

24 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