Legal Opinion · Dissent

W.R. v. H.I.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided March 16, 1992No. 02A03-9110-CV-328Published

1DissentStaton, Judge

I dissent. The wrong public policy has been applied by the Majority. Their public policy rationale of "stability in legally-established relationships" and "avoidance of disruption years later" (Maj. at 1279) is embodied in the statute of limitations provisions of Ind.Code 81-6-6.1-6.

The right public policy is found in Ind. Code 31-6-6.1. The 1979 enactment of the juvenile code permitted a man alleging himself to be a child's father to bring an action to establish paternity, without reference to his or the mother's marital status. Ind. Code 81-6-6.1-2(a)(2).

Too, all parties stipulated that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Fairrow v. FairrowIndiana Supreme Court · 1990
  2. A----. B v. C----. DIndiana Court of Appeals · 1971
  3. In Re the Marriage of MoserIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. Crawford v. BeatriceIndiana Court of Appeals · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API