Tennessee baby custody case abstract on parental rights in divorce.

Darla Jo Adams Audirsch v. Griffin Lynn Audirsch

The husband and spouse on this Moore County, Tennessee, case had been married when the mom gave beginning to a toddler.  However each events acknowledged, and a DNA take a look at established, that the husband was not the daddy of the kid.  The trial court docket denied the husband any parenting time, and he appealed to the Tennessee Courtroom of Appeals.

The mom didn’t file a short with the appeals court docket or in any other case take part within the enchantment.

The husband argued that, regardless of the organic proof, that he was the “authorized guardian” of the kid.  He based mostly this upon a Tennessee Statute which creates a presumption that when a toddler is born throughout a wedding, that the person married to the mom is the kid’s father.

However the appeals court docket famous that whereas this statute creates a presumption that the person is the daddy, that presumption may be rebutted by the proof.  On this case, the DNA take a look at (which the court docket identified had been requested by the husband) stated that there was a zero p.c probability that he was the organic father.

On this case, the court docket held that the presumption had been rebutted, and the statute offered that when the presumption had been rebutted, the person was now not the authorized guardian.

For these causes, the Courtroom of Appeals affirmed the decrease court docket and remanded the case for any essential proceedings.  The court docket’s unanimous opinion was authored by Choose Arnold B. Goldin.

No. M2020-00279-COA-R3-CV (Tenn. Ct. App. Jan. 22,  2021).

See authentic opinion for actual language.  Authorized citations omitted.

To study extra, see Child Custody Laws in Tennessee.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here