Skip to content
Name: V.S. v. M.L.
Case #: A138827
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 12/27/2013
Summary

Biological father had standing to bring an action to establish a parental relationship with the minor even though mother’s husband was a presumed father. V.S. (Victor) impregnated mother, Mary, but Mary married Roger one month before the birth of Donald. Roger and Mary brought Donald into their home as their son and prevented Victor from having any contact with him. Victor petitioned to establish a parent-child relationship, and Mary moved to dismiss, alleging that Victor had no standing to bring the action. The trial court granted the motion, and Victor appealed. The appellate court reversed, finding that Victor did have standing to bring the petition, and that further proceedings were necessary to determine whether Victor or Roger should be adjudicated to be the minor’s legal father. Under the current version of Family code section 7630, subdivision (c), Victor, who claims to be Donald’s biological father, is entitled to bring an action even though Roger is unquestionably a presumed father.