|Law school matching|
|Law School Rankings|
|Law School Search|
|FREE Law School Outlines|
|Click the nut|
|Family Law Nina Winter 2001|
Family Law Outline
ALTERNATIVE LIVING ARRANGEMENTS
A. WHAT IS A FAMILY?
Facts: P is trying to get permit for house for 6 retarded people in a single family zone
Holding: ct said this is not a family under the ordinance
Facts: Ps are unmarried, have 3 kids, they were denied housing
Holding: ct said you can’t deny it on basis that they’re unmarried. Primary purpose of act is to shelter poor
Facts: group of college kids living in a house
Holding: ct said they were a family under the ordinance
Facts: custody of child
Holding: wife moved kids to commune - where father was not allowed to visit kids. Ct said she delegated her parental authority to the commune
Facts: rent control tenant died, P, guy living there wanted to stay
Holding: ct found for P, looked at factors
B. Constit Prot for Non-Traditional Life Styles
Facts: college kids wanted to live in single family zone, ord had def of family
Holding: ct held against students
C. Access to Dispute Resolving Powers of Judiciary
Facts: P & D lived together for 7 yrs, all prop in his name. P sued to get 1/2 of prop. P said she had oral contract w/D, she gave up her job for him
Holding: ct said p had a case. Lower ct grant of sj was wrong
PARENTS AND CHILDREN
A. The Extended Family
Facts: housing ord, single family. Grandma had her son & 2 grandkids (not brothers) live w/her. Because they were living w/her, she was convicted of crim offense.
Holding: ct said ord violated dp clause of 14th amend. City argued under Belle Terre, but ct said that ord affected only unrelated indiv. Ct said this is intrusive reg into family (freedom of personal choice). Ord serves goals of city only marginally. Constit protects sanctity of family. Plurality found constit prot for extended family. Dissent: ct should not have used ss here
Facts: issue was custody of 7 yr old boy. Dispute between dad and maternal g.parents. boy’s mom & sis were killed in car accident. Dad asked g.p’s to take care of son, they took him to CA w/them. Dad remarried, wanted Mark back, they refused.
Holding: ct said Mark was better off w/ g.p’s. this case did not arise because dad was unfit. Ct felt g.p’s provided better/stable environment. Psychiatrist painted bad Bohemian picture of dad.
Facts: soc services instit proceed in family ct to review foster care of Peter (5 yrs old). No one could care for him, so mom executed & delivered a vol placement agreement to transfer temp custody & auth comm to consent to his adoption
Holding: ct said family ct did not err in denying grandma custody. Ct said there is no stat or judicial pref for idea that a fit member of an extened family takes precedence over adoptive parent selected by agency
Facts: kid’s maternal g.ma filed petition for visitation under ga g.parent visit stat, it was opposed by both parents.
Holding: ct found ga stat unconstit violation of state & fed constit. Sup ct has made clear that state interf w/a parent’s right to raise kids is justifiable only when state acts in police power to protect kid from harm. State may only impose visit over parental objection on showing that failing to do so would harm kid.
Facts: trust doc, mom needed hospital care, son put her in nursing home, he was named as income benef. Son wanted her to get medicaid, it was refused because she had $, son refused to pay bill, declared bankruptcy
Holding: son was liable for mom’s nursing home bills, son was not denied ep or dp. Son could pay from trust assets, ct applied rational basis test, son was just deadbeat
A. Restrictions on who may marry
1. Trad Restrictions - Incest
Facts: H & W married 1/13/83, they got their marriage annulled by ct because they didn’t know they were related. Nov 1988, both parties wanted to re-open judgment because W is his half-niece not niece. They challenged stat, remarried in CA
Holding: ct said this marriage is incestuous under stat. Incest is crime in US. Cite Skinner which said brother & sister include 1/2 blood
Facts: william, who is now dead, married widow who had daughter from former husband (who is P here). 1900 wife got divorce from William & 4 yrs later, he married P. William has 4 kids from P (her mom died). P tried to get prop after William died, estate said no, your marriage was incestuous & void.
Holding: this marriage is valid. When william got divorce from p’s mom, p was no longer his daughter.
2. Trad Restrictions - Sexual Pref & identity
Facts: 2 females were denied marriage license. Argued 3 constit rights were violated - right to marry, right of assoc, right to free exercise of religion
Holding: ct said marriage between 2 people of same sex is not a “marriage.” Ct looks at dictionary def of marriage, marriage has always been considered union between opposite sex. Ct said appellants are not prevented from marrying under ky statute, they are incapable of entering into marriage as that term is defined. What they propose is not a marriage.
Facts: ps are all same sex couples, were denied marriage licenses solely on ground that they were of same sex. Ps challenge constit of HA stat.
Holding: ct said stat was unconstit, it estab a sex-based classif. Sex is suspect category, ss test. D carries burden (heavy). Violates ep of HA constit.
LEGALNUT.COM NOTICES AND DISCLAIMERS:
Copyright Property. This outline is © copyrighted 2006 by Legalnut.com (Site). This outline, in whole or in part, may not be reproduced or redistributed without the written permission of Site. A limited license for personal academic use is permitted, as described below or in Site’s Terms and Conditions of Usage page on this site. This outline may not be posted on any other website without permission. Site reserves the exclusive right to distribute, change or modify this outline in whole or in part.
This Outlines does not constitute legal advice and is not a replacement for obtaining legal counsel.
No Warranties as to Accuracy. Site has made efforts to provide the best possible outlines, but, Site MAKES NO WARRANTIES AS TO THE ACCURACY OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS OUTLINE. THIS OUTLINE IS PROVIDED TO YOU ON AN AS-IS BASIS. USE IT AT YOUR OWN RISK, AND DO NOT RELY ON IT FOR LEGAL ADVICE. IF YOU NEED LEGAL HELP, PLEASE CONTACT A LICENSED AND QUALIFIED ATTORNEY IN YOUR JURISDICTION. AS THIS OUTLINE HAS BEEN WRITTEN BY A LAW STUDENT, IT MAY CONTAIN INACCURATE INFORMATION.
Students Can Not Claim This Outline As Their Own. Furthermore, some law schools have policies which permit law students to bring their self prepared course outlines into final exams. If your law school has such a policy, you are expressly prohibited from claiming this outline as your own or from representing that any of the other outlines contained on this Site are your own unless you are the author of this outline. If you are not sure of your law school's policy, you should contact the appropriate staff at your school.
Notices and Procedures for Making Claims of Copyright Infringement. If you have a claim of copyright infringement against this outline or any other content of this Site, then please see this Site’s Terms & Conditions of Use page for procedures of notifying Site of any alleged infringement.
Attorney jobs listings and sites with attorney salary information, attorney job search functions, and salaries by law firm.
Law school rankings show how competitive your lsat scores would be at top law schools in the US.
Law school admissions advice is available both at the LSAT forum and throughout the pre-law section, including LSAT prep options, law school personal statement help, LSAT score distributions and law school bar exam pass rates.
|Re:anonymous tip - criminal charge|
wetyj 16-02-12 06:43
habbaspilaw1 08-02-12 04:33
timeless 31-01-12 07:06
|Kobe Bryant to break the record was the...|
Salessessdfsd 29-01-12 04:18
|Re:no fault question|
Dingo 08-01-12 23:22
|Temporary US residence & w-2|
Jackie 08-01-12 23:12