H and W were married in 1995. They belonged to an Internet 'swingers' group. At a party sponsored by the group in October 2001, W met D, who was also married but whose wife was W became pregnant. W told H and that he might not be the child's father. C.S. was born on July 17, 2002. H was present at the birth and was named as the father on the birth certificate. On August 11, 2002, a DNA excluded H as the biological father. The following month, H and W decided to end their marriage. They continued living together for a time in order to make alternative arrangements. In November 2002, W contacted D via e-mail. She claims D lied about his blood type to convince her he could not be C.S.'s father. D then removed his identity from the Internet forum. Sherry did not know D's last name and was unable to contact him until July 2003, when she recognized him from an Internet personal ad. D once more terminated his Internet identity. In November 2003, C.S. was scheduled for surgery. After some research, W was able to locate D to seek family medical information. D met with W and C.S., gave W $200, and said he would start a college fund for C.S. In January 2004, a DNA test confirmed D was the father. D started paying Sherry $500 a month. In May 2004, W informed D that H and W planned to remove H's name from C.S.'s birth certificate and asked D to replace it with his own. D refused. On August 4, 2004, H filed a petition seeking to disestablish himself as the father of C.S. and to adjudicate D as the father. The trial court dismissed the action as barred by the statute of limitations.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.