Erin W. v. Charissa W., 297 Neb. 143

Charissa and Erin W. married in June 2013 while Charissa was pregnant; Charissa told Erin before marriage she had also had intercourse with a man identified as "G.T." around conception.
Child was born during the marriage, Erin was listed on the birth certificate, and both parents held Erin out as the child’s father and shared parenting time pre- and post-separation.
Parties separated in Sept. 2014; Erin filed for dissolution in 2015. Charissa moved for court-ordered genetic testing to challenge Erin’s paternity; Erin opposed testing.
The district court denied Charissa’s motions for genetic testing, held the statutory presumption of legitimacy applied, found Erin to be the child’s father, and awarded joint legal and physical custody with a prior 5-day alternating parenting schedule and child support.
Charissa appealed, arguing the court erred by denying genetic testing, by finding the presumption of legitimacy unrebutted, and by awarding joint custody despite asserted nonpaternity.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Charissa)	Defendant's Argument (Erin)	Held
Whether court should order genetic testing during dissolution to disprove paternity	Charissa sought court-ordered testing to rebut presumption that Erin is father	Erin opposed testing; child born during marriage and Erin presumed father	Denial affirmed — ordering testing was discretionary and not compelled absent applicable statutory basis; no abuse of discretion
Whether presumption of legitimacy was rebutted without genetic test	Charissa argued her testimony and photos showing resemblance to G.T.’s son rebut presumption	Erin relied on presumption, his longstanding acknowledgment and parental conduct	Presumption not rebutted — evidence insufficient (wife's uncorroborated testimony and photos inadequate)
Applicability of disestablishment statute (§ 43-1412.01) before final paternity determination	Charissa relied on statute to justify testing	Erin and court: statute applies to disestablishment after a legal paternity determination, not pre-decree	Court: § 43-1412.01 inapplicable pre-decree; does not mandate testing before final legal determination
Whether joint custody was inappropriate given disputed biological paternity	Charissa said custody should favor her if paternity disproved; urged error in joint award	Erin relied on history of shared custody and best-interests stability	Joint custody affirmed — parties had successfully operated under joint plan and trial court did not abuse discretion

Donald v. Donald, 296 Neb. 123 (statutory presumption of legitimacy and standard for rebuttal)
Alisha C. v. Jeremy C., 283 Neb. 340 (testimony of spouse insufficient to overcome presumption of legitimacy)
Helter v. Williamson, 239 Neb. 741 (historic rulings that spousal testimony cannot rebut legitimacy presumption)
Zahl v. Zahl, 273 Neb. 1043 (factors supporting joint physical custody and limiting its use to stable parental situations)