About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (April 2017 through August 2017)

handle is hein.ali/alifm0031 and id is 1 raw text is: PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF FAMILY DISSOLUTION CHAPTER 3. CHILD SUPPORT TOPIC 2. ESTABLISHING THE AMOUNT OF A CHILD-SUPPORT AWARD § 3.10 Determining Child-Support Obligations When a Nonparent Exercises Residential or Custodial Responsibility Mass.2016. Cit. in ftn.; com. (c) cit. in ftn. In a dispute between two female former partners of a non- marital relationship, plaintiff sued defendant, who was the biological parent of two children born during the relationship through in vitro fertilization with plaintiff s full acknowledgment, participation, and consent, seeking a declaration of parentage under a state statute providing that a man was presumed to be the father of a child born out of wedlock if he, jointly with the mother, received the child into their home and openly held the child out as theirs. The trial court granted defendant's motion to dismiss. Reversing and remanding for further proceedings, this court held that a person could establish himself or herself as the presumptive parent of a child even in the absence of a biological relationship with the child. The court rejected defendant's argument that the purpose of the statute could be ensured through the adjudication of plaintiff as a de facto parent, citing the Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution § 3.10 in noting that a de facto parent was not afforded all of the privileges of a legal parent. Partanen v. Gallagher, 59 N.E.3d 1133, 1141. CHAPTER 6. DOMESTIC PARTNERS TOPIC 1. SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES § 6.01 Scope 111.2016. Com. (a) cit. in conc. and diss. op. Former partner of a same-sex relationship filed an action to partition the family home she shared and jointly owned with other partner; defendant counterclaimed for sole title to the home and an interest in plaintiff s share of a business. The trial court partitioned the home but dismissed defendant's counterclaims based on a prior Illinois Supreme Court decision, which held that unmarried cohabitants were precluded from bringing claims against one another to enforce mutual property rights where, as here, the rights asserted were rooted in a marriage-like relationship between the parties. The court of appeals vacated in part and remanded the counterclaims. This court vacated and reversed that portion of the decision, and affirmed the judgment of the trial court. The concurring and dissenting opinion cited Principles of the Law of Family Dissolution § 6.01 in arguing that defendant's counterclaim for an interest in plaintiff's business could proceed on a restitution theory, and that the decision relied on by the trial court had to be overruled because it was outmoded and out of For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most