Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Nevares v. M.L.S.

Utah Supreme Court

Decided February 6, 2015No. 20120763Published

1ConcurrenceJustice Durham

153 I concur in the result the majority reaches, and I also concur with the reasoning in Part ILA of its opinion. I disagree, however, with the majority's reasoning in Part II.B. Utah Code section 78B-6-111 does not limit its application to sexual conduct that occurred in Utah or between Utahns; rather, it applies to all fathers whose paternal rights are based on sexual conduct that would be illegal if it occurred in Utah. It therefore applies to Mr. Nevares.

[ 54 However, although Mr. Nevares's sexual conduct with M.L.S. would constitute a felony under Utah law, it was legal where it…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Quilloin v. WalcottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Ruben Pena v. Edward Mattox, Charles Bretz, Patricia Schneider, and Others UnknownCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
  3. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Michael MEDJUCK, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  4. Brooks v. A.S.Utah Supreme Court · 2015
  5. In re: J.M.S.Utah Supreme Court · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API