Nature of the Case
To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.
Facts
M and Nichole ZZ. (W), wife, were married prior to M giving birth to the subject child in August 2014. The child was conceived, on the second attempt, through an informal artificial insemination process performed in M's home using sperm donated by D. The parties had known one another for a short time. They had discussed M's desire to have a child together, and D volunteered to donate his sperm for this purpose. D with his partner present, knowingly provided his sperm to assist M and W in having a child, and W performed the insemination. Prior to the insemination, the parties had entered into a written agreement drafted by D that was signed by M, W, and D in the presence of his partner. D volunteered to donate his sperm so that M and W could have a child together, expressly waived any claims to paternity with regard to any child conceived from his donated sperm and further waived any right to custody or visitation, and M and W, in turn, waived any claim for child support from D. At some point after the birth of the child, the parties disagreed on Ds access to the child, and his partner subsequently admitted in sworn testimony that she had destroyed the only copy of that agreement. Upon her birth, the child was given the W's surname, and M and W lived together as a family with the child and M's other two children. D did not see the child until she was one or two months old. D filed this paternity petition and, later, a petition seeking custody of the child. M opposed the request for a paternity test, requested a stay of any testing and a hearing, and apparently filed a cross-petition for custody. M moved to dismiss the paternity petition based upon both the presumption of legitimacy accorded to a child born of a marriage and the doctrine of equitable estoppel. Family Court denied the motion to dismiss and ordered genetic testing. M appealed.
Support@ bsmsphd.com
Casebriefs Co