Archives: Paternity

Three new laws affect family law matters regarding child removal procedures, deposition restrictions, and “Sara’s Law.”

On March 1, 2018, Loeb & Herman will debut Wisconsin Family Law Case Finder, a subscription based legal research service specifically designed for family law attorneys.

Fathers have neither the right nor the ability to restrict a pregnant woman from her constitutionally protected liberty.

Continued analysis of the Wisconsin Court of Appeals consolidated decision in Hendrick v. Hendrick and State v. Skarzynski.

Garry and Jennifer Hendrick were married in early September of 1999. Jennifer’s daughter was born in late January of 2000. Before Jennifer started her divorce action against Garry, Garry had himself, the girl and the couple’s other child tested to see if he was their biological father. He is not. The State started a paternity action.

Any confusion about Wisconsin law regarding credits for child support arrears might have (finally) been put to rest, thanks to a recent supreme court decision.

In a previous article, we looked at the Wisconsin Supreme Court’s significant family law cases from 2004. In this article, I will focus on significant 2004 cases decided by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals.

Per tradition, it is time to take a look back at the significant family law cases which were decided during the past year, with either plaudits for the well-reasoned decisions or – forgive me, judges – one last kick at those with which I take issue.

What happens when new legislation causes a direct conflict with an existing statute? Did the Wisconsin legislature forget about the existing law? How does an appellate court, which is supposed to interpret statutes, not rewrite them, deal with such a conflict?

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals intermittently tells us that it is primarily an error-correcting court. Recently, however, the court couldn’t resist the temptation to depart from that primary role to make a little new law, in Randy A.J. v. Norma I.J.,