R.M.

R.M. v. T.A.

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2015D064922California8,679 words

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…

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.