KUNKLE
v.
TEXAS; MICHAEL H. ET AL. V. GERALD D.; BHANDARI V. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE; WILKINSON V. CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS OF THE YAKIMA INDIAN NATION ET AL.; COUNTY OF YAKIMA ET AL. V. CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS OF THE YAKIMA INDIAN NATION ET AL.; CORY V. STANDARD FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSN. ET AL.; HIGH V. ZANT, WARDEN; STANFORD V. KENTUCKY; WILKINS V. MISSOURI; WILLIAMS V. LYNAUGH, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; CARELLA V. CALIFORNIA; WARD ET AL. V. ROCK AGAINST RACISM; SOUTH CAROLINA V. GATHERS; DIAMOND V. CHARLES ET AL.; COWHIG V. MARSH, SECRETARY OF THE ARMY; WORRELL V. B. F. GOODRICH CO.; BARROW V. WAHL ET AL.; DAVENPORT V. UNITED STATES; CREWS V. ILLINOIS; GUERRA V. TEXAS; WILLIAMS V. GEORGIA; POGGI V. CALIFORNIA; BEATY V. ARIZONA; LIGHTSEY V. YEAGER, WARDEN, ET AL.; JOHNSON V. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; BEETS V. TEXAS; PANTOJA V. STATEVILLE CORRECTIONAL CENTER ET AL.; BYNUM V. WOOD; MADSEN V. MORRELL ET AL.; HART V. FRAME ET AL.; HERNANDEZ V. CALIFORNIA; MASON V. REES, WARDEN; SHANNON V. O'LEARY, WARDEN, ET AL.; COLEMAN ET AL. V. BUTLER; WILLIAMS V. NEW YORK ET AL.; HOLLAND V. UNITED STATES; NGUYEN V. OKLAHOMA, IN RE QUALMAN ET UX., DARWALL, AKA FARMER V. MICHIGAN ET AL.
KUNKLE
TEXAS; MICHAEL H. ET AL. V. GERALD D.; BHANDARI V. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE; WILKINSON V. CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS OF THE YAKIMA INDIAN NATION ET AL.; COUNTY OF YAKIMA ET AL. V. CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS OF THE YAKIMA INDIAN NATION ET AL.; CORY V. STANDARD FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSN. ET AL.; HIGH V. ZANT, WARDEN; STANFORD V. KENTUCKY; WILKINS V. MISSOURI; WILLIAMS V. LYNAUGH, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; CARELLA V. CALIFORNIA; WARD ET AL. V. ROCK AGAINST RACISM; SOUTH CAROLINA V. GATHERS; DIAMOND V. CHARLES ET AL.; COWHIG V. MARSH, SECRETARY OF THE ARMY; WORRELL V. B. F. GOODRICH CO.; BARROW V. WAHL ET AL.; DAVENPORT V. UNITED STATES; CREWS V. ILLINOIS; GUERRA V. TEXAS; WILLIAMS V. GEORGIA; POGGI V. CALIFORNIA; BEATY V. ARIZONA; LIGHTSEY V. YEAGER, WARDEN, ET AL.; JOHNSON V. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; BEETS V. TEXAS; PANTOJA V. STATEVILLE CORRECTIONAL CENTER ET AL.; BYNUM V. WOOD; MADSEN V. MORRELL ET AL.; HART V. FRAME ET AL.; HERNANDEZ V. CALIFORNIA; MASON V. REES, WARDEN; SHANNON V. O'LEARY, WARDEN, ET AL.; COLEMAN ET AL. V. BUTLER; WILLIAMS V. NEW YORK ET AL.; HOLLAND V. UNITED STATES; NGUYEN V. OKLAHOMA, IN RE QUALMAN ET UX., DARWALL, AKA FARMER V. MICHIGAN ET AL.
492 U.S. 937
Supreme Court of the United States (1989)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
G.F.C. v. S.G. and D.G., 686 So. 2d 1382 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…nd and the wife to be incompetent to testify regarding the husband’s access. Michael H. v. Gerald D., 491 U.S. 110, 124, 109 S.Ct. 2338, 2342-43, 105 L.Ed.2d 91 (1989)(citing R. Graveson & F. Crane, A Century of Family Law, 1857-1957), reh’g denied, 492 U.S. 937, 110 S.Ct. 22,106 L.Ed.2d 634 (1989). Our supreme court recently reaffirmed the common law presumption of legitimacy in Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Privette, 617 So. 2d 305 (Fla.1993). In Privette, HRS sued Privette for suppor…