James

Appellant denied he was Tyler's father. In response to Burton's request, the military informed her that in order to obtain child support, she and appellant would be required to undergo genetic testing. The military further informed Burton that appellant would be granted leave to participate in genetic testing following his return from the Persian Gulf. Despite appellants' offer to pay for the genetic testing, Burton never sought it. Instead, she requested child support benefits from the County of Los Angeles, naming appellant as Tyler's father.

In 1994, following Burton's application to receive child support benefits through the county, the district attorney filed a complaint to establish appellant's parental relationship with Tyler and his obligation to pay child support. Although the complaint was served on appellant, he failed to respond to it. As a result, a default judgment was entered in 1996 declaring appellant to be the father and ordering him to pay $121 a month in child support through the county. After judgment was entered, appellant made child support payments but continued to deny paternity and played no role in Tyler's life. Following entry of judgment,…

I join in the majority opinion which I have signed but write separately to express some of the concerns that remain following our opinion in County of Los Angeles v. Navarro (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 246 [ 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 905 ] ( Navarro ) and the Fifth Appellate District's decision in County of Fresno v. Sanchez (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 15 [ 37 Cal.Rptr.3d 192 ] ( Sanchez ). Although the Legislature responded to Navarro by enacting Family Code section 7648.4 (see Sanchez , at pp. 17, 19 ), the present case suggests further legislative consideration may be appropriate. In Navarro, supra , 120 Cal.App.4th 246 , we were presented with the legal straightjacket in which the County of Los Angeles had dressed Mr. Navarro after genetic testing had conclusively proved that he was not the father of two boys. The county had earlier obtained a default judgment against him that had legally established paternity, albeit without testing. Several years after the entry of the default judgment, San Bernardino County filed a separate paternity action against him involving the same children. In the second action, paternity tests were utilized and established that Mr. Navarro was not the boys' father. San…

SUMMARY

Under a default judgment, a trial court declared a man was the father of a child and determined he was obligated to pay child support. After the man made child support payments, genetic testing determined he was not the father. Based on the test results, the man moved to set aside the paternity judgment and obtain reimbursement of support payments made. The court set aside the paternity judgment, but determined the man was not entitled to reimbursement under either the Family Code or case law. We likewise conclude that the statutory and decisional authority preclude reimbursement and, therefore, affirm the order.

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

In 1992, Tami Burton gave birth to a son, Tyler, and named appellant Taron Grant James as the child’s father on the birth certificate. When Tyler was bom, appellant was in the military service assigned to the Persian Gulf and was unaware of the child’s birth. Burton subsequently sought child support payments through appellant’s military benefits. Her request for child support was appellant’s first notice of Tyler’s birth.

Appellant denied he was Tyler’s father. In response to Burton’s request, the military informed…