Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Wirsing

Michigan Court of Appeals

Decided October 24, 1995No. Docket 159638Published

1Dissent

Holbrook, Jr., J.

(dissenting). The majority has misread an unambiguous provision of the Mental Health Code (mhc) and erected a virtually insurmountable obstacle to the exercise of procreative choice by developmentally disabled citizens of this state. Accordingly, I dissent.

*139I

A

"The jurisdiction, powers and duties of the probate court and of the judges thereof shall be provided by law.” Const 1963, art 6, § 15. Thus, neither the jurisdiction of the probate court nor the powers and duties of probate judges can be enlarged or restricted by the courts of this state. In re Kasuba Estate, 401 Mich…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Roe v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  2. Griswold v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  3. Skinner v. Oklahoma Ex Rel. WilliamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
  4. Eisenstadt v. BairdSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  5. Carey v. Population Services InternationalSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

15 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