Webber v. Randle (Mississippi 2021)
An estate administrator has an obligation to determine the heirs and can challenge paternity. An estate administrator, the widow of the decedent, filed to determine heirship. The decedent had four children: two born during his first marriage, one with the widow, and a child for whom paternity had yet to be established. His widow, the administrator of his estate, filed to determine heirship. The chancery court ordered DNA testing of all four children. The results showed a high probability that the children of the ex-wife and the children of the widow were not related, which meant the decedent was not the biological father of the two children from his first marriage.
Read MoreIn the Interest of KLW and JLW (Colorado 2021)
The Colorado Uniform Parentage Act (UPA) does not allow for a child to have more than two legal parents. When there are two competing unrebutted presumptions, the court must decide which presumption controls based on the weightier considerations of policy and logic. The children in this case had three possible parents: their mother, CLF, who was in a relationship with their mother, and their biological father. The children were removed from their mother in a dependency and neglect action. CLF filed a motion to declare her as the mother of the children. Following a hearing, the juvenile court named the biological father as the legal parent, and CLF appealed.
Read MoreGreer v. Greer (Mississippi 2021)
A parent who fails to pursue a paternity challenge will not be provided with post-trial relief. The mother became pregnant while separated from the father. The parents reconciled and the baby was given the father’s last name. When the parents filed for divorce, the father requested genetic testing for the younger child. His request was granted, and he was ordered to schedule and pay for the testing, which he failed to do. He also didn’t appear at the divorce hearing. In the final decree, he was ordered to pay support for the parties two children. The father appealed arguing the court should have determined paternity for the younger child before granting the divorce.
Read MoreIn re Estate of Yudkin (Colorado 2021)
A common law marriage may be established by the mutual consent or agreement of the couple to enter the legal and social institution of marriage, followed by conduct that supports this agreement. All the circumstances must be considered to find the agreement. In this probate case, the husband died intestate. His ex-wife petitioned to be the personal representative of his estate. His “wife” sought removal of the ex-wife and appointment as the personal representative as his common law wife. The district court found no marriage existed under the test in place, and the common law wife appealed.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of LaFleur and Pyfer (Colorado 2021)
The recognition of the right for same-sex couples to marry in Colorado didn’t preclude couples from entering into common law marriages prior to that date. In 2003, Pyfer and LaFleur, a same-sex couple, exchanged rings and held a ceremony acknowledging their commitment. In 2018, Pyfer filed for dissolution of marriage. LaFleur argued they were not married as same-sex marriage wasn’t recognized in Colorado until 2014. Evidence showed that Pyfer had proposed to LaFleur and the men held a ceremony. Pyfer held himself out as married and listed LaFleur as his spouse on legal documents. Based on this evidence, the district court found the parties entered into a common law marriage and divided their assets accordingly. Pyfer appealed the property division, and LaFleur appealed the determination of a valid marriage.
Read MoreIn re Marriage of Hogsett and Neale (Colorado 2021)
A common law marriage may be established by the mutual consent or agreement of the couple to enter the legal and social institution of marriage, followed by conduct that supports this agreement. The court must consider all relevant factors to determine if the parties had an agreement. The same-sex parties in this case were in a relationship from November 2011 to November 2014. They never married even after that became an option in October 2014. The parties separated and filed a petition for dissolution of marriage. They mediated their issues and dismissed the petition without the need for a determination as to their marital status. Later, Hogsett sought retirement assets and maintenance. Neale objected, arguing the parties were not married. Hogsett filed a second petition for dissolution stating that the parties were married at common law.
Read MoreIn re MF (Kansas 2020)
A same-sex partner, who didn’t give birth to a child, can be recognized as a parent using K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 23-2208(a)(4) when the child’s birth parent consented to shared parenting at the time of the child’s birth. This case came before the Supreme Court on appeal from lower court decisions denying a same-sex partner parentage…
Read MoreIn re W.L. and G.L. (Kansas 2020)
The unmarried partner of a same sex couple can be recognized as a legal parent under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 23-2208(a)(4) presumption of maternity. The appellant filed to establish parentage of the twins born to her same-sex partner. The district court denied the petition, which the court of appeals upheld. The Supreme Court reversed. An unmarried…
Read MorePope v. Fountain (Mississippi 2019)
In a paternity proceeding, all necessary parties must be joined. The child who was the subject of this case had a presumed and biological father. The biological father filed to establish paternity, and the mother responded. The presumptive father was not joined as a party to the action even though he was ordered to pay…
Read MoreIn the Matter of W.L. and G.L. (Kansas 2019)
To prove parentage, an unmarried person must first show a presumption of parentage by a preponderance of the evidence. The burden then shifts to the responding parent to rebut the presumption by clear and convincing evidence. This case involves parentage for twins born to same-sex partners using artificial reproduction. The partners never married or entered…
Read MoreKline v. Holmes (Kansas 2018)
The presumption of paternity is not conclusive and can be rebutted with clear and convincing evidence. The rebuttal can also be overcome. In this case, the district court established parentage for a child who was born to a same-sex couple by applying the presumption that the “notorious” presumption. The biological mother of the child appealed,…
Read MoreAlicia C v. Jeremy C (Nebraska 2012)
The state statutes allow fathers whose paternity was adjudicated in a divorce decree to challenge the paternity determination at a later date.
Read MoreMichael H. v. Gerald D. (Federal, US Supreme Court, 1989)
Only a presumed father or mother may rebut a presumption of paternity.
Read MoreState ex rel. Secretary of SRS v. Miller (Kansas 1998)
When a child is born out of wedlock and no credible evidence exists that the child has a presumed father, the trial court may order genetic testing in a paternity action without first conducting a best interest hearing (Ross hearing), which is to determine whether the testing would be in the best interests of the…
Read MoreTL v. CS (Wyoming 1999)
A presumptive father must provide clear and convincing evidence to meet his burden of proving the results of genetic test favoring another man are inaccurate or somehow deficient.
Read MoreGDK v. State (Wyoming 2004)
When faced with conflicting statutory presumptions of paternity, the court will use a best interest standard to determine parentage.
Read MoreIn re Parentage of Shade ex rel. Shade (Kansas 2006)
The presumption that a man is the father of a child if he notoriously or in writing recognizes paternity of the child must be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence or by a court decree establishing paternity of the child by another man.
Read MoreDNW v. State, Dept. of Family Services (Wyoming 2007)
A presumed father, who holds a child out as his own and signs a paternity acknowledgment, will be held to be the child’s natural father.
Read MoreState ex rel. SRS v. Kimbrel (Kansas 2010)
In an action brought by the Secretary of Social and Rehabilitation Services on behalf of a mother and her biological child for an order of child support, a district court may determine that clear and convincing evidence proves a man who has executed a voluntary acknowledgment of paternityis not the biological father of the child,…
Read MoreIn re Paternity of Janzen v. Janzen (Kansas 2010)
The statutory presumption of paternity may only be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence or by a court decree establishing paternity of the child by another man or by weighing two conflicting presumptions and deciding which presumption will control based upon the weightier consideration of policy, logic, and the best interests of the child.
Read MoreGreer v. Greer (Kansas 2014)
Presumptions of paternity may arise in favor of different men. When the court is faced with two conflicting presumptions of paternity, it is required to conduct a hearing to determine which presumption “is founded on the weightier considerations of policy and logic, including the best interests of the child” before it determines the child’s legal…
Read More