Rogers v. Wcisel
312 Mich. App. 79
| Mich. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- Rogers and Wcisel had an on‑again/off‑again relationship; Rogers gave birth to MW in March 2007 and Wcisel signed an acknowledgement of parentage at the hospital.
- The parties later separated; a 2008 consent order awarded Rogers sole custody and required Wcisel to pay child support.
- Wcisel later obtained DNA testing showing a 0% probability he was MW’s biological father and filed (July 2012) to revoke his acknowledgement of parentage, attaching an affidavit and the DNA results.
- The trial court held a bench trial to assess whether the affidavit established a statutory ground (mistake of fact, fraud, etc.) under MCL 722.1437(2); the court found Wcisel had doubts about paternity when he signed and denied revocation.
- On appeal the Court of Appeals concluded the trial court erred: Wcisel’s affidavit together with unchallenged DNA results satisfied the statutory mistake‑of‑fact requirement and the case was remanded for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Rogers' Argument | Wcisel's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wcisel’s motion to revoke his acknowledgement of parentage met MCL 722.1437(2)’s requirement (mistake of fact) | Rogers argued trial evidence showed Wcisel had doubts before signing, so no mistake of fact; equitable parent considerations supported keeping paternity | Wcisel argued his affidavit plus unchallenged DNA proving he is not the biological father established a mistake of fact warranting revocation | Court held affidavit + unchallenged DNA sufficed to establish mistake of fact under the RPA and reversed the denial of revocation |
Key Cases Cited
- Bay County Prosecutor v. Nugent, 276 Mich App 183 (Mich. Ct. App.) (unchallenged DNA plus evidence that signer believed he was the biological father supports mistake of fact)
- Sinicropi v. Mazurek, 273 Mich App 149 (Mich. Ct. App.) (unchallenged DNA and parties’ agreement on biological fathership sufficient to establish mistake of fact)
- Helton v. Beaman, 304 Mich App 97 (Mich. Ct. App.) (DNA evidence and mistaken belief by acknowledged father at time of signing support revocation action)
- Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Williams, 330 Mich 275 (Mich.) (definition of "mistake of fact" as belief that a fact exists when it does not)