Skip to content
Name: In re E.O.
Case #: A124534
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 02/05/2010
Summary

Court properly denied presumed father status to father with paternity judgment. The minors, ages 7 and 14, were removed from mother due to sexual abuse by mother’s boyfriend. Appellant was the biological father of both minors but had no contact or relationship with either of them. He had a paternity judgment against him and had been ordered to pay child support, but had not done so. The Department recommended reunification services for mother but not for appellant because he was not a presumed father. The court denied father’s request for presumed father status and for reunification services. Father renewed his request for presumed father status at the six-month review hearing, stating that he had tried to visit the girls over the years, but that he was prevented by the mother. He also conceded that he had never lived with the mother, and found out about one of the minors several years after she was born. He did not establish a relationship with her because he thought he could not since he had not paid child support. Father contended on appeal that the trial court wrongly denied his request for presumed father status. The appellate court affirmed the denial, noting that father had never lived with the minors and had ignored them for most of their lives. A paternity judgment by itself does not require that a father be declared a presumed father. Because he did not establish that he came within any of the categories set forth in Family Code section 7611, the court properly declined to declare him the presumed father.