Legal Research Blog

 

Despite DNA Proof, Kentucky Strikes Down Paternity Claim

On April 24th, the Supreme Court of Kentucky decided in favor of a couple who had appealed a family court’s decision to consider the petition for paternity of a third party who claimed to be the biological father of their child (“J.A.R.”). The child’s mother, referred to as J.N.R. in the case, conceived him out of wedlock with James Rhoades (who has DNA testing to prove it), while her husband was in the military.


Kentucky law, however, states that a child can only be considered out of wedlock if it can be proven that the “marital relationship between the husband and wife ceased ten (10) months prior to the birth of the child” (KRS 406.011). The justices were bitterly fragmented over the meaning of this statute, writing 5 separate opinions both concurring with and dissenting from the majority opinion. Justice Cunningham, of the majority, dedicated much of his opinion to the necessity of protecting the inviolability of marriage from third parties, and of protecting children from the knowledge of their parentage:

“We are in need of a bold declaration that the marriage circle, even one with an errant partner, will be invaded at one’s own legal risk”


Justice Abramson, in a fiery dissent, took issue with the majority’s desire to shield families from the realities of paternity, appealing to common sense and the notion of living with “inconvenient truths.” She also disagreed with the majority’s interpretation of KRS 406.011, arguing that the marital relationship between the appellees had clearly dissolved 10 months prior to J.A.R.’s birth, regardless of their legal marital status:

“A marital relationship has emotional, physical, social and, yes, moral dimensions and is characterized by a monogamous bond between the two parties to the relationship.”


The Supreme Court of Kentucky’s decision

Do you agree with the outcome of the case? Discuss your point of view in our forum.

May 1st is Law Day!

May 1st is Law Day! Reflect on what brought you into the legal profession and read President Bush’s proclamation below:

Law Day is defined as follows in 36 U.S.C. § 113:

  • (a) Designation.— May 1 is Law Day, U.S.A.
  • (b) Purpose.— Law Day, U.S.A., is a special day of celebration by the people of the United States—
    • (1) in appreciation of their liberties and the reaffirmation of their loyalty to the United States and of their rededication to the ideals of equality and justice under law in their relations with each other and with other countries; and
    • (2) for the cultivation of the respect for law that is so vital to the democratic way of life.
  • (c) Proclamation.— The President is requested to issue a proclamation—
    • (1) calling on all public officials to display the flag of the United States on all Government buildings on Law Day, U.S.A.; and
    • (2) inviting the people of the United States to observe Law Day, U.S.A., with appropriate ceremonies and in other appropriate ways, through public entities and private organizations and in schools and other suitable places.

A Proclamation by the President of the United States of America:

The right of ordinary men and women to determine their own future, protected by the rule of law, lies at the heart of America’s founding principles. As our country celebrates the 50th anniversary of Law Day, we renew our commitment to the ideals on which this great Nation was established and to a robust system of ordered liberty.

The American legal system is central to protecting the rights and freedoms our Nation holds dear. The theme of this year’s Law Day, “The Rule of Law: Foundation for Communities of Opportunity and Equity,” recognizes the fundamental role that the rule of law plays in preserving liberty in our Nation and in all free societies. We pay tribute to the men and women in America’s legal community. Through hard work and dedication to the rule of law, members of the judiciary and the legal profession help secure the rights of individuals, bring justice to our communities, and reinforce the proud traditions that make America a beacon of light for the world.

Nearly 800 years ago, the Magna Carta placed the authority of government under the rule of law; centuries later, the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution marked tremendous advances in the march of liberty. These documents established enduring principles that guide modern democracies. Today, we are reminded of that past and look toward a hopeful future as we work to secure the liberty that is the natural right of every man, woman, and child.

On Law Day, U.S.A., our Nation celebrates our belief in the equality of each person before God and renews our commitment to strive to bring America ever closer to its founding ideals.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, in accordance with Public Law 87-20, as amended, do hereby proclaim May 1, 2008, as Law Day, U.S.A. I call upon all the people of the United States to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies and activities. I also call upon Government officials to display the flag of the United States in support of this national observance.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this thirtieth day of April, in the year of our Lord two thousand eight, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-second.

GEORGE W. BUSH

Interview with the Inventor of the World Wide Web

In commemoration of the world wide web’s 15 year anniversary, its inventor, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, recently discussed the birth of the internet and his vision for its future with the BBC. While young people today may take the internet for granted, Sir Tim points out that its creation and dissemination were plagued by uncertainty and controversial decisions. One of the most historic of these choices was to release the code to the public:

“We had to convince them (the directors at CERN) that this was going to take off and it was a really big thing. And therefore Cern couldn’t hold on to it and the best thing to do was to give it away.”

In the end, competitors who tried to sell their technology lost their edge, and the world wide web continues to expand and evolve today thanks to the contributions from millions of people all over the world. Looking ahead, Sir Tim states:

“What’s exciting is that people are building new social systems, new systems of review, new systems of governance…My hope is that those will produce… new ways of working together effectively and fairly which we can use globally to manage ourselves as a planet.”

BBC Interview

Tell us how the world wide web has changed your life in our forum.

Tips for Setting Up Your Firm in The New China

This week, Peter A. Neumann, who recently assisted the U.S. based firm Greenberg Traurig in setting up its new Shanghai office, provided some incite into establishing a business in China at a Georgia Tech conference. Neumann, who has been living and working in China since 1993, had both words of caution and encouragement for those hoping to expand their company to this economic powerhouse. Here are some of Neumann’s suggestions:

1. Keep abreast of China’s market regulations, which are modified frequently.

2. Take your time in deciding to enter the Chinese market. Have a developed and in-depth understanding of the risks involved. Keep in mind that procuring the proper licenses and approvals can often be a frustrating process.

3. While China has opened up drastically in the last decade, some laws do favor Chinese companies and firms over their foreign counterparts.

Overall, Neumann stressed the amazing changes he has seen during his time in China, emphasizing that “China wants to be a world player and benefit from the world economy.”

Click Here To share and discuss some tips of your own!

Millionaire’s Amendment Goes Before the Supreme Court

This week the Supreme Court began hearing the oral argument for the case Davis v. Federal Election Commission, a case that may decide the constitutionality of the Millionaire’s Amendment included in the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. This amendment, intended to level the playing field for races in which wealthy candidates make use of their own funds, loosens the restrictions on campaign financing for opponents to those who put $350,000 or more of their personal wealth towards their run for office.

The case was brought to the D.C. District Court by Jack Davis, who ran for a congressional district in New York in 2006. Davis alleged that the law violated the rights guaranteed in the “First Amendment by chilling the speech of self-financed candidates and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth Amendment by giving the opponents of self-financed candidates a competitive advantage.”(Fastcase subscribers click for full case) The district ruled in favor of the FEC, finding no inherent threat in the amendment.

Judging from the first day of oral arguments, however, the Supreme Court justices appear divided over the issue. Chief Justice John Roberts stated that the Millionaire’s amendment seems to lower restrictions in the campaign process, further protecting both opponents rights under the First Amendment. Justice Scalia, however, took issue with the idea of leveling the playing field, stating:

“What if one candidate is more eloquent than the other one? You make him talk with pebbles in his mouth?”

Let us know your thoughts on this issue in our forum.

Page 190 of 215« First...160170180«188189190191192»200210...Last »