Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In the Interest of Doe

Hawaii Supreme Court

Decided December 26, 2002No. 24079Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion of

MOON, C.J.

Although I concur with the result reached by the majority, I disagree with the majority’s overly broad holding that a parent’s allegations of a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12131-12134, could never be raised as a defense in a proceeding to terminate parental rights. I also disagree with the majority’s decision to overrule In re Jane Doe, Born on February 2, 1999, 100 Hawai'i 20, 58 P.3d 78 (App.2002) (ICA opinion) and, in effect, to absolutely foreclose the possibility of raising an ADA defense in a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thompson v. DavisCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
  2. In the Interest of DoeHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API