Kantaras v. Kantaras
District Court of Appeal of Florida
884 So.2d 155 (2004)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
At the age of 27, Margo Kantaras (plaintiff) legally changed her name to Michael and underwent sex reassignment, including hormonal treatments, a total hysterectomy, a double mastectomy, and other procedures. Subsequently, Michael met Linda (defendant), who was pregnant by a former boyfriend. Linda was aware of Michael’s sex reassignment, and the couple decided to get married. On the marriage license application, Michael represented that he was male. Once the pair was married, Michael applied to adopt Linda’s child by her former boyfriend, representing to the court that he was Linda’s husband. Afterward, Linda gave birth to another child through artificial insemination. Later, Michael filed a petition for divorce from Linda and sought custody of the two children. Linda answered the complaint and counter-petitioned for dissolution of the marriage, alleging that the marriage was void ab initio, because the marriage violated Florida law. Additionally, Linda claimed that Michael’s adoption of her child violated Florida’s ban on homosexual adoption. After a trial, the court found that Michael was legally a male and that the marriage was valid. The trial court granted the divorce and awarded primary residential custody of the two children to Michael. Linda appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Fulmer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.