22 N.E.3d 804
Ind. Ct. App.2014Background
- Child T.H. was born Sept. 21, 1998; Father (Tyrone Hutchins) signed a paternity affidavit at the hospital the next day while he was 17, in foster care, and living in a group home.
- Father admitted sexual relations with Mother and believed he was the child’s father when he signed; he later sought and obtained visitation and was ordered to pay child support beginning in 2002.
- Indiana law then allowed rescission of a paternity affidavit only within 60 days or for fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact. Genetic testing or rescission requests must be made within 60 days.
- Father filed a petition to rescind/vacate the affidavit in Sept. 2013, alleging duress, coercion, and mistake because he was a minor and lacked representation when he signed.
- The trial court denied relief, finding (1) the 60-day limit had long passed, (2) Father had ratified the affidavit by seeking visitation and participating in proceedings for years, and (3) Father presented no credible evidence of fraud, duress, or mistake sufficient to overcome the statutory bar.
- Father’s motion to correct error was denied; he appealed, arguing the court abused its discretion in denying rescission.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court abused discretion by denying Father’s petition to rescind/vacate a paternity affidavit executed when he was a minor | Father: his affidavit should be rescinded due to duress, coercion, and mistake of fact because he was a 17-year-old in foster care who lacked counsel/guardian presence when he signed | Mother/State: the 60-day statutory limits expired; Father ratified the affidavit through subsequent actions (visitation/support proceedings) and offered no credible evidence undermining paternity | Court: No abuse of discretion. Statutory time limits and ratification barred relief; duress/mistake not proven in these rare/extreme-circumstance terms |
Key Cases Cited
- Petersen v. Burton, 871 N.E.2d 1025 (App. Ct.) (presumption of correctness for trial court on motion to correct error)
- Perkinson v. Perkinson, 989 N.E.2d 758 (Ind.) (standard for reviewing trial court findings and abuse of discretion)
- In re Paternity of H.J.B., 829 N.E.2d 157 (App. Ct.) (Indiana has no separate statutory action to disestablish paternity; statutes establish paternity)
- In re Paternity of R.C., 587 N.E.2d 153 (App. Ct.) (paternity challenges after prior acknowledgments are allowed only in extreme, rare circumstances)
- J.M. v. M.A., 950 N.E.2d 1191 (Ind.) (remand for paternity testing where material mistake of fact might have existed at signing)