cuyahoga-support-enforcement-agency-v-guthrie
To find that the juvenile court had the authority to vacate the prior determination of paternity under either (B)(2) or (4), given the circumstances of this case, would clearly be contrary to law.
cuyahoga-support-enforcement-agency-v-guthrie
To find that the juvenile court had the authority to vacate the prior determination of paternity under either (B)(2) or (4), given the circumstances of this case, would clearly be contrary to law.
adoption-forms-and-consequences.doc
THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF ADOPTION:
ITS EFFECTS ON CHILDREN AND PARENTS
the-people-ex-rel-the-department-of-public-aid.doc
SPRINGFIELD (AP) — Documents trump DNA when it comes to deciding a child’s legal father, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled Thursday. The court held that a man who signed a paternity agreement saying he fathered a baby cannot challenge the document now, even though DNA tests prove he isn’t the biological father. The agreement can be challenged if it was obtained through fraud or duress but not because it is simply wrong, the court said.
davisvol39no2_storrow.pdfdavisvol39no2_storrow.pdf
Richard F. Storrow-Professor of Law, Pennsylvania State University
THERESA GLENNON
This commentary provides a brief background on some of the circumstances in which states currently provide conflicting and often unsatisfying resolutions regarding paternity, and thus responsibility for children born during the marriage or cohabitation of a couple. Second, it describes the Principles‘ efforts to address the inconsistencies and inadequacies of state paternity laws by adopting the concept of estoppel to deny parental support obligation. Finally, this commentary offers a critical evaluation of these efforts. While some aspects of the estoppel to deny a child support obligation are important steps forward, other aspects do not adequately resolve the most troubling situations that currently arise in the child support context when biological paternity comes into dispute.
Elizabeth Bartholet