R.M.
R.M. v. T.A.
Opinion
Opinion
Haller, J.
Filed 1/27/
CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
R.M., D064922
Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. D528261)
T.A.,
Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Joel R.
Wohlfeil, Judge. Affirmed.
Law Office of Leslie Ellen Shear, Leslie Ellen Shear and Julia C. Shear Kushner,
for Appellant.
R.M., in pro. per., for Respondent.
In this family law proceeding, T.A. (Mother) appeals from a judgment finding that
R.M. (RM) is the presumed father of Mother's biological daughter (Child). Mother
conceived Child through artificial insemination procedures, and RM is not the biological
father. The trial court declared RM to be Child's presumed father by applying the parentage presumption set forth in Family Code section 7611, subdivision (d) (hereafter,
section 7611(d)).1 This statutory provision creates a presumption that a person is the
natural parent of a child if the person shows by a preponderance of the evidence that he
or she received the child into his or her home and openly held the…