Also known as:substantial relationships · substantial relationship test
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
2 senses
1
in family law
A connection between a nonparent and a child that satisfies statutory criteria and supports an award of custody or visitation when denial would cause harm to the child. The connection requires consistent caretaking without expectation of compensation and is evaluated under best-interests standards.
2
Sense 1
1
in family law
A connection between a nonparent and a child that satisfies statutory criteria and supports an award of custody or visitation when denial would cause harm to the child. The connection requires consistent caretaking without expectation of compensation and is evaluated under best-interests standards.
Sources & Authorities· 2 primary sources
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Uniform Acts
Sense 2
2
in choice of law
A connection between a state and the parties or transaction that supplies a reasonable basis for selecting that state's law to govern contractual rights even when the parties could not have resolved the issue by explicit agreement.
Sources & Authorities· 1 source
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
A connection between a state and the parties or transaction that supplies a reasonable basis for selecting that state's law to govern contractual rights even when the parties could not have resolved the issue by explicit agreement.
Each sense below has its own examples, sources, and questions.
Examples2
Nonparent Seeks Visitation Order
Sylvia Santos cared for her niece daily for three years after the child's mother became incarcerated. When the mother was released and denied further contact, Sylvia petitioned for visitation. The court examined whether Sylvia's ongoing caretaking created the required connection and whether cutting off contact would harm the child.
Unwed Father Challenges Adoption
Sean Steele never lived with his child or provided regular support after the mother placed the infant for adoption. He filed a paternity action months later. The court determined that his biological tie alone did not establish the connection needed to block the adoption.
Lehr v. Robertson et al.463 U.S. 248 (1983)
Frequently Asked2
What must a nonparent show to establish the connection required for custody or visitation under the Uniform Act?+
The nonparent must demonstrate consistent caretaking without compensation and that denial of contact would harm the child. The statute ties the connection to the best interests of the child and requires proof of both elements before a court may grant relief.
Supporting sources
How does the connection requirement affect an unwed father's constitutional claim to block an adoption?+
A biological tie alone is insufficient. The father must also show he established a meaningful connection through responsibility for the child's daily care. Without that connection the state may terminate his rights without violating due process.
Supporting sources
Examples4
Gender Classification Faces Scrutiny
A state statute punished only males for statutory rape even though both sexes could engage in the conduct. The court assessed whether the classification advanced an important objective through a sufficiently close connection to that objective.
Michael M. v. Superior Court of Sonoma County450 U.S. 464, 477–479, 101 S.Ct. 1200, 1208–1209 (Stewart, J., concurring)
Utility Challenges Advertising Ban
A state commission prohibited electric utilities from promoting the use of electricity. The utility argued the ban suppressed commercial speech. The court evaluated whether the restriction was justified by a governmental interest connected to the means chosen.
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Commission of New York447 U.S. 557, 100 S. Ct. 2343, 65 L. Ed. 2d 341 (1980)
State Defends Single-Sex Admissions
A public military college admitted only men and claimed the policy promoted diversity in education. Challengers argued the exclusion of women lacked the necessary connection to an important governmental objective under equal protection standards.
United States v. Virginia518 U.S. 515, 533 (1996)
Veterans Preference Challenged
A state law granted absolute hiring preference to veterans, the vast majority of whom were male. A female applicant argued the policy disproportionately excluded women without the required connection to a legitimate objective.
Personnel Administrator of Massachusetts v. Feeney442 U.S. 256, 279 (1979)
Frequently Asked1
When does a choice-of-law clause fail because the chosen state lacks the required connection?+
The clause fails when the chosen state has no meaningful ties to the parties or the transaction and no other reasonable basis supports the selection. In that situation a court will not apply the chosen law even if the parties agreed to it.
Supporting sources
518 U.S. 515 (1996)Constitutional Law
…Hogan, supra , at 723; Heckler, supra , at 744, standard that a gender-based classification "must bear a close and substantial relationship to important governmental objectives." Feeney, supra , at 273. Our cases dealing with gender discrimination also require that the proffered purpose for the challenged law be the actual…