In re C.E.
391 S.W.3d 200
Tex. App.2012Background
- Ehrhardt sued to terminate C.E.'s parent-child relationship under Tex. Fam. Code §161.005(c).
- Trial court denied genetic testing and dismissed; Ehrhardt appealed claiming prima facie case.
- C.E. was born to Stephanie Garcia in 1995; Ehrhardt once acknowledged paternity.
- Ehrhardt signed birth certificate; 2001 CSRO established paternity and child support.
- In 2011, OAG petitioned to modify CSRO; Ehrhardt sought termination under (c).
- Pre-trial hearing showed Ehrhardt alleging misrepresentation led him to believe he was the father; Garcia did not testify.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prima facie case for testing under §161.005(c)? | Ehrhardt; misrepresentation plus circumstantial evidence. | OAG/Garcia; no explicit misrepresentation identified. | Yes; verified petition plus circumstantial misrepresentation evidence suffices. |
| Did misrepresentation cause Ehrhardt to believe he fathered C.E.? | Ehrhardt asserts belief arose from misrepresentation. | Garcia did not testify to misrepresentation; no direct proof. | Prima facie showing established by petition and circumstantial evidence. |
| Standard of review for prima facie determination? | De novo review of legal question. | Lower court findings deferred; standard disputed. | Reviewed de novo as a question of law. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dodson v. Watson, 220 S.W.2d 771 (Tex. 1920) (prima facie standard definition of evidence)
- Baker v. Goldsmith, 582 S.W.2d 404 (Tex. 1979) (merits of prima facie proof considered de novo)
- In re E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., 136 S.W.3d 218 (Tex. 2004) (prima facie standard in discovery context)
- Nichols v. Jack Eckerd Corp., 908 S.W.2d 5 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1995) (merits of prima facie proof reviewed de novo)