CALIFORNIA FAMILY LAW
...Custody and Visitation
......Paternity/Surrogacy Issues
.........Presumed Father/Mother
............Presumed Fathers
 18 Cards On This Topic:
  • Failing to accord determinative weight to F's biological relationship to minor did not violate his due process right to parent her.
  • Trial ct. correctly found F to be presumed parent where it did not rely on F's biological connection to C, but his conduct toward C, including receiving C into his home and holding out C as his own.
  • By misconstruing "harm" factor of FC 7612(c) and interpreting 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.
  • Substantial evidence supported finding F was presumed F, but not BioDad, where evidence was conflicting, and seemed possible he was, but also possible he was not, BioDad.
  • Applying presumed parent statutory scheme was not an unconstitutional interference with fundamental right of single-mother-by-choice to parent; non-biological F was C's presumed parent and presumption not rebutted.
  • 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.
  • FC 7613(b) does not preclude sperm donor from establishing he is a presumed father under FC 7611; Steven S. not controlling.
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Parentage finding as to alleged biological F incomplete—juvenile ct. required to determine if he was C's biological father as part of parentage determination, whether by genetic tests or based on other evidence presented.
  • Non-offending, stable, financially responsible adult, who came forward at earliest possible moment and when C in foster care for only 8 mos., is entitled to presumed father status and reunification services.
  • Biological F may try to establish PF status despite competing presumptions supporting H who executed voluntary paternity dec.; court may not set aside voluntary dec. w/o joining declarant and evaluating competing claims.
  • 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.
  • Court erred in denying F presumed father status in dependency proceeding based upon blood test confirming he was not minor's biological father.
  • Where no one else was a candidate for the privilege and responsibility of fathering child, it was not ••an appropriate action•• in which to find section 7611(d) presumption of fatherhood rebutted.
  • Presumed fatherhood status, for purposes of dependency proceedings, not necessarily negated by evidence the presumed father is not the biological father.
  • Man who married his brother's ex-W failed to prove he was presumed father of child of first marriage or rebut statutory presumption of brother's paternity.
  • Presumed father provisions rebutted by blood test establishing nonpaternity.


    •