K.E.M. v. P.C.S.
38 A.3d 798
| Pa. | 2012Background
- Mother sought child support from Appellee, believed to be biological father of G.L.M.
- Trial court dismissed based on presumption of paternity due to intact marriage to H.M.M. and paternity by estoppel.
- DNA testing excluded H.M.M. as father; mother and Appellee had an extramarital affair during marriage.
- Court found H.M.M. held himself out as father and provided support; estoppel applied.
- Superior Court affirmed the estoppel dismissal and found the presumption of paternity not applicable; remanded for review in light of estoppel.
- This Court reversed and remanded to assess best interests of the child with a more individualized approach to estoppel.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether paternity by estoppel can defeat a support claim | K.E.M. argues estoppel should not apply where child knows biological father. | Appellee argues estoppel is proper to honor the child’s best interests and stability of the existing family. | Estoppel may apply but only on a developed record and best interests standard. |
| Role of genetic testing in estoppel determinations | Mother wants genetic testing considered as part of estoppel analysis. | Appellee contends estoppel can overlook biology to protect child’s interests. | Genetic testing may be considered on remand; estoppel can be used despite biology in specific contexts. |
| Impact of intact-marriage presumption vs. estoppel in non-intact contexts | Presumption should not bar support when marriage not fully intact and biology is known. | Presumption remains strong; estoppel serves where marriage is intact or effectively recognized as such. | Presumption narrowed; estoppel remains viable where best interests require. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brinkley v. King, 549 Pa. 241 (Pa. 1997) (presumption of paternity generally applies to child born during marriage)
- Fish v. Behers, 559 Pa. 523 (Pa. 1999) (estoppel when either spouse holds child out as theirs)
- Jones v. Trojak, 535 Pa. 95 (Pa. 1993) (estoppel and testing influence in paternity determinations)
- Vargo v. Schwartz, 940 A.2d 459 (Pa. Super. 2007) (calls for careful consideration of best interests; testability concerns)