834 N.W.2d 211
Minn. Ct. App.2013Background
- Appellant challenges a district court order granting summary judgment adjudicating him as the minor child’s father.
- The 2010 Minnesota uniform support petition sought paternity and child support and an adjudication or testing order.
- Genetic testing produced a 99.99% likelihood that Mitchell is the father.
- Limberg alleged protective facts of intercourse during conception; Mitchell claimed no recollection and episodic impotence.
- The district court granted summary judgment, finding Mitchell’s denials equivocal and not establishing a genuine issue.
- This appeal affirms the district court’s decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court correctly applied the burden to rebut the presumption | Mitchell argues he need not prove clear and convincing evidence at summary judgment | State argues presumption requires clear and convincing rebuttal evidence | Yes; the court applied the heightened burden to rebut the presumption at trial, but not to summary judgment. |
| Whether Mitchell’s rebuttal evidence created a genuine issue of material fact | Mitchell asserts his equivocal denials and impotence claims create a fact issue | State argues two genetic tests and admission of intercourse negate a genuine issue | No; equivocal denials do not create a genuine issue under the statutory standard. |
| Whether evidence of other possible fathers was properly disregarded at summary judgment | Mitchell contends potential additional fathers should be explored | Limberg denied other potential fathers; cross-examination is insufficient to create a fact issue | Yes; speculation about others is insufficient to defeat summary judgment. |
Key Cases Cited
- Williams v. Curtis, 501 N.W.2d 653 (Minn.App.1993) (presumed father’s denial and test result analyzed under heightened burden at trial; summary judgment context considered)
- Nash v. Allen, 392 N.W.2d 244 (Minn.App.1986) (conception date issue; absence of clear record on conception timing)
- Howie v. Thomas, 514 N.W.2d 822 (Minn.App.1994) (reversal of directed verdict despite strong paternity test; notes burden under testimony of denial)
- Johnson v. Van Blaricom, 480 N.W.2d 138 (Minn.App.1992) (speculative allegations of other intercourse insufficient to create issue)
- DLH, Inc. v. Russ, 566 N.W.2d 60 (Minn.1997) (summary judgment standard; view evidence in light of burden; admissible materials enumerated)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (clear and convincing standard at summary judgment for certain burdens; ultimate burden concept)
- Weber v. Anderson, 269 N.W.2d 892 (Minn.1978) (definition of clear and convincing evidence)