Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Holtmann v. Knott

Wisconsin Supreme Court

Decided June 13, 1995No. 93-2911Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDay, J.

I join in the very well written concurring and dissenting opinion by Justice Steinmetz. I write separately to emphasize certain points.

There is nothing in this case that warrants the deprivation of the rights of this biological mother to determine what is in her child's best interests and to decide who will and will not have visitation with her child. Neither marriage nor blood ties justifies this courts' creation of an arrangement not recognized until today. There was no marriage — the "ceremony" gone through by the mother and her former companion is a nullity — it is completely unrecognized…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Wisconsin v. YoderSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Watts v. WattsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1987
  3. In Interest of Angel Lace M.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Sporleder v. HermesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Gotz v. GotzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1957

2 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