Legal Opinion · Dissent
In re Baby Z.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided January 26, 1999No. SC 15868; SC 15869Published
1DissentBerdon, J.
The majority would have us believe that the only way Malinda could adopt Baby Z. — the child that she and Anne, her life partner, brought into this world — would be for Anne to terminate all of her legal rights to her biological child.1 A reasonable construction of the statutory scheme governing adoptions in the state of Connecticut does not support this contention. Moreover, and of fundamental importance, the best interests and well-being of Baby Z. require that Malinda adopt him so that the three — Malinda, Anne and Baby Z. — can live together as a family unit with *534legal ties.2 As the amici…
2Cases cited47 opinions
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Reynolds v. SimsSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Plyler v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Moore v. City of East ClevelandSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Ross v. MoffittSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.