K.E.M. v. P.C.S.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
38 A.3d 798 (2012)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
K.E.M. (plaintiff) and P.C.S. (defendant) conceived a child during an extramarital affair. K.E.M. told her husband about the affair, genetic testing excluded him as the father, and his name was not put on the child’s birth certificate. P.C.S. acknowledged the child as his son, gave him gifts, and occasionally spent time with him. When P.C.S. ended the affair, K.E.M. separated from her husband but did not divorce, and sued P.C.S. for child support. The trial court recognized her husband as the legal father on two grounds. First, the marital presumption of paternity applied because he had remained married to K.E.M., and no evidence showed irretrievable marital breakdown. Second, paternity by estoppel applied because he held himself out to publicly as the child’s parent, at his baptism, and on tax returns. The appellate court affirmed based on paternity by estoppel, but rejected the marital presumption of paternity, reasoning that it did not apply when a husband knows he is not a child’s biological father. K.E.M. appealed to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Saylor, J.)
Dissent (Baer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 820,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
