Legal Opinion

In re K.M.H.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided October 26, 2007No. 96,102Published

1Dissent · CaplingerCaplinger, J.

I respectfully disagree with the majority’s analysis of the constitutionality of K.S.A. 38-1114(f) as applied to D.H. I would hold the statute unconstitutional as applied to D.H. for the reason that it violates his fundamental right to parent his children without due process of law.

In reaching its conclusion that K.S.A. 38-1114(f) comports with due process, the majority analyzes at least two extra-jurisdictional cases which hold that statutes creating an absolute bar to donor paternity violate due process rights as applied to a known donor: McIntyre v. Crouch, 98 Or. App. 462, 780 P.2d 239…

Also in this document: Dissent · Hill.

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  3. Troxel v. GranvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Lehr v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  5. Caban v. MohammedSupreme Court of the United States · 1979

6 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