CHILDREN AND THE LAW
...Evidentiary Issues
......Paternity Cases
.........Presumption of Paternity
47 Cards On This Topic:

Conclusive presumption of paternity. Limited exceptions.

Where no one else was a candidate for privilege and responsibility of fathering child, it was not ••an appropriate action•• in which to find section 7611(d) presumption of fatherhood rebutted.

By misconstruing the "harm" factor of FC 7612(c) and interpreting the statute as pertaining solely to C's living arrangement, court failed to consider "all relevant factors" when determining detriment to C; uncle's presumed parent status not rebutted.

Trial ct. erred prejudicially in finding W's petition to establish ex-lover's parental relationship with C was untimely and in not entertaining her request for genetic testing.

F whose bad decisions kept him from carrying out parental responsibilities didn't meet the high bar set by Kelsey S., and it was error to grant him presumed F status instead of C's stepfather, who did meet the Kelsey S. requirements.

Evidentiary paternity presumptions are irrelevant in dependency. FC 7611 presumption of paternity rebutted by FC 7612(c) relates to ••biological•• paternity, irrelevant to presumed father status in dependency action.

Although BF did everything he could to be a father to C, he must also show an existing familial bond with C sufficient to warrant giving him "equitable" presumed father status.

Judgment establishing fatherhood for ••c/s purposes•• is a paternity judgment w/in meaning of FC 7612(c), and rebuts FC 7611(d) presumption; rebuttal does not require finding that a man with a prior paternity judgment is a presumed father.

Trial court erred in finding biological F was not a presumed F where he did everything required to qualify under Kelsey S. was then cut off from contact with C by mother and court.

Substantial evidence supported trial ct.'s finding F was a Kelsey S. father—failure to provide financial assistance to mother and less than ideal relationship with her alone could not deny F such status.

Substantial evidence supported finding father's visitation with C was not consistent and regular and, thus, was not sufficient to satisfy the requirement that he received her into his home.

Remand required where trial court misapplied the law re UPA presumed parent status and erred in finding P failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she was a presumed parent.

Where C has both a presumed and a biological father, court must hold an evidentiary hearing to reconcile the competing paternity interests and determine which are founded on the weightier considerations of policy and logic.

Dawn D. defeats purported F's claim of a DP liberty right to an opportunity to continue his relationship with Cs; important parental relationship did not begin while Cs ••in utero••.

Juvenile court must weigh conflicting presumptions as between 3 presumed parents under FC 7612(b) standard and in view of circumstances after the parentage determination was made.

Sufficient evidence showed Charisma openly held C out as her natural child, there was ample evidence of a parental relationship, and proper factors were considered in determining she was a presumed parent under FC 7611(d).

F had standing to file paternity action wherein D's voluntary paternity declaration set aside as F had status as a Kelsey S. father, and FC 7575 did not preclude his filing action.

Late-appearing father whose paternity was hidden from him by the mother is not a presumed father entitled to reunification services without regard to the best interests of the child.

FC 7611 and FC 7570 et seq. violate constitut'l equal protection principles to extent they purport to deny F presumed father status on sole ground he made his voluntary acknowledgment of paternity in MI instead of CA.

Alleged F trying to establish nonexistence of paternity is an interested party under FC 7630 (b), if he alleges there are facts, which if believed, show he might qualify as a presumed father under FC 7611 (d) and have standing.

Trial court properly found unwed, teenaged F had not met Kelsey S. requirements and had no protected right allowing him to stand in way of C's adoption.

Biological F may try to establish presumed F status despite competing presumptions supporting H who executed voluntary paternity dec.; court to reconsider set aside of voluntary dec. and evaluate competing claims.

Wife of man who fathered C in an extramarital relationship may not assert status as C's mother when the biological mother has come forward promptly to assert her maternal rights.

W could not assert equitable estoppel arising out of purported stepparent adoption agrmt where mother not a surrogate mother, F and W did not assert agreement mother executed was valid, and F and W never pursued stepparent adoption.

Cal.'s statutory presumptions and standing rules do not violate biological father's constitutional rights where biological father has no existing relationship with C.

P had standing to bring paternity action as presumed father; trial court erred in refusing to apply Nicholas H. where C was not a dependent child, and gave considerable weight to P's biological non-paternity.

Although stepfather lived with C and mother for 7 yrs and met basic criteria for presumed father status, those positive factors outweighed by his status as registered sex offender and true findings that he molested C.

Where conflicting presumptions arise under FC 7611 (a), and (d), under FC 7612, court must make factual findings re each presumption and then weigh which presumption is entitled to greater weight.

Order denying D's belated motion to set aside paternity and c/s default judgment reversed where D wasn't served and blood tests proved he wasn't father; when mistake occurs in c/s action, County must correct it, not exploit it.

Under facts of case, Nicholas H. decision applies with equal force to a woman, as a presumed mother.

Alleged father's lack of presumed father status rendered paternity irrelevant in dependency proceeding.

Order setting aside voluntary declaration reversed where presumed F who signed it not joined in proceedings; unless he asserts position causing change of ruling, court "can and should" enter new order setting aside declaration.

County had standing to bring motion to set aside voluntary declaration of paternity.

No abuse of discretion in implied finding that mother was sufficiently diligent in filing CCP 473 motion to set aside voluntary declaration of paternity.

Presumed fatherhood status, for purposes of dependency proceedings, not necessarily negated by evidence the presumed father is not the biological father.

Where 2 presumed fathers, and court properly found one entitled to greater weight under FC 7612(b), no error in not ordering genetic testing sua sponte.

FC 7611 et al. violate constitutional rights of man seeking presumed father status where he can be unilaterally denied that status by being prevented from receiving child into his home.

Constitutional protection afforded biological fathers extends to men who are not biological fathers but meet the other criteria for presumed father status under Kelsey S.

Trial court acted in accordance with law and its finding that D did not have access to mother during period of conception, despite genetic paternity index of 1290, supported by substantial evidence.

Due process clause precludes state from applying conclusive presumption of paternity where it has effect of terminating ••existing•• father-child relationship.

Because P received child into his house, he was presumed father and had statutory standing to bring paternity action.

15-yr. old unwed father who failed to assume parental responsibilities did not meet requirements for presumed father status under Kelsey S. and cannot stop adoption.

Conclusive presumption of paternity not applicable where H not cohabiting with W at time child conceived; cohabitation defined.

Court abused discretion in ordering blood testing of mother and child prior to vacating of paternity judgment.

The presumption of paternity in dependency cases.

Paternity presumptions and termination of alleged/presumed father’s rights

Cases discussing paternity presumption.