Jm v. Ma, 950 N.E.2d 1191

J.M. signed an Affidavit of Paternity at the time of W.H.'s birth when he was a minor.
Mother and J.M. began their relationship in 1998; W.H. was conceived during pregnancy.
Guardian M.A. sought support for W.H. and was assisted by Title IV-D program.
In 2009, the State filed a Petition for Entry of Support and Health Insurance; hearing set for May 22, 2009.
J.M. requested a continuance due to lack of counsel; continuance denied; default judgment and temporary support issued; J.M. later obtained counsel.
In August 2009, J.M. moved to set aside the paternity affidavit; trial court ruled lack of appearance at a support hearing ratified the affidavit; decision challenged on appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether absence at the support hearing can ratify a paternity affidavit.	JM argues lack of appearance cannot ratify the affidavit.	MA/State contends default ratified the affidavit.	No; ratification by absence was improper.
What statutory grounds allow rescission of a paternity affidavit.	JM contends statutes require fraud, duress, or material mistake plus genetic exclusion.	MA/State maintains strict compliance with statutory conditions.	Rescission requires fraud, duress, or material mistake and genetic testing excluding the signer.
Is remand required for genetic testing under Indiana Code to rescind paternity?	JM seeks remand to permit genetic testing as required by statute.	State argues testing not necessary if other factors exist.	Remand is required to allow compliance with testing requirements.
Should the case be assigned to a new commissioner on remand?	JM requests reassignment.	No; rights to change judge revived on reversal.	No new assignment necessary.

J.M. v. M.A., 928 N.E.2d 230 (Ind.Ct.App.2010) (reversal of trial court; premised on material mistake; remand for testing not required by statute)
J.M. v. M.A., 940 N.E.2d 832 (Ind.2010) (transfer-related decision; relevance to procedural posture on remand)