Michael H. v. Gerald D.

Good Law
191 Cal. App. 3d 995·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1699·236 Cal. Rptr. 810
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 7, 1987Docket Nos. B015384, B018241California5,736 words

Opinion

Opinion

Arabian, J.

Introduction

Plaintiff, cross-defendant and appellant Michael H. brought this reverse paternity action against defendant, cross-defendant and respondent, Gerald D.; his wife, defendant and cross-defendant, Carole D.; and defendant, cross-complainant and appellant Victoria D.; to establish that he is Victoria D.’s biological father and to establish a father/child relationship with her. The trial court appointed a guardian ad litem/attomey to represent Victoria D.’s interests in the action and she filed a cross-complaint to establish a legal or de facto/psychological parent-child relationship with Gerald D. and/or Michael H. Gerald D. moved for summary judgment on the first amended complaint and the cross-complaint on the ground that there were no triable issues of fact regarding application of the conclusive presumption of Evidence Code section 621, subdivision (a), that the issue of a married woman cohabiting with her husband, who is not impotent or sterile, is a child of that marriage. The trial court granted the motion and Michael H. and Victoria D. separately appealed.

Facts

Carole D. and Gerald D. were married and commenced living together as husband and wife on…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.