Estate of Wittman v. Huston

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• interpreting Kansas statute on presumptions of paternity, noting decisions by sister states regarding related statutes
• using a multifactor interest-analysis similar to the Restatement [Second] of Conflict of Laws §§ 6, 287[1] & comment d [1969], for a conflict arising in a parentage case
• when the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, courts “need, not resort to statutory construction”
• sperm donor must have written agreement with mother to have standing to assert parental rights
• although 1973 uniform act governed paternity of children born only to married women as result of artificial insemination, version adopted by Kansas omitted word \married\
• in context of artificial insemination, biological paternity in itself establishes no right to participate in parenting decisions under constitutional equal protection or due process considerations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).