State of Florida, Dept. of Revenue v. Kyle Patrick Alletag, 156 So. 3d 1110

DOR petitions for writ of certiorari to review a trial court order directing paternity testing in a child-support proceeding.
Father acknowledged paternity on the birth certificate but sought DNA testing to confirm paternity.
Hearing officer treated father's answer as a petition to disestablish paternity and recommended testing.
Trial court issued an order directing all parties to undergo paternity testing at a laboratory.
Court grants certiorari and quashes the order, holding testing was improper absent controversy or good cause.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the order departs from essential requirements of law	DOR argues paternity testing required only if controversy and good cause exist	Alletag argues for testing to confirm paternity	Yes; order quashed
Whether paternity was placed in controversy	No controversy; father did not deny paternity	There was desire to verify paternity	Not placed in controversy
Whether good cause for paternity testing was shown	Statutory good cause standards unmet	DNA test desired for certainty	No good cause shown
Whether the hearing officer had authority to order genetics testing	Hearing officer lacks authority in contested paternity cases	Request for DNA testing should be permitted	Hearing officer cannot order absent controversy/good cause

Lynch v. State, 53 So.3d 1154 (Fla.1st DCA 2011) (establishes controversy and good cause framework)
Travis v. State, 971 So.2d 157 (Fla.1st DCA 2007) (paternity testing discovery, not dispositive authority for final order)
Brown v. Brown, 980 So.2d 590 (Fla.1st DCA 2008) (preference for testing does not create controversy)
McKnight v. Robinson, 58 So.3d 356 (Fla.1st DCA 2011) (examples of irreparable harm and proper remedy in certiorari)
Gardner v. Long, 937 So.2d 1235 (Fla.1st DCA 2006) (recurrent authority on family-law certiorari)