Regardless, its statements about the scope of subdivision b are dicta, and its holding applies to only subdivision a 2 of section Instead, they contend as they did below that the trial court could disregard that evidence and hold appellant to his sworn statements that he never acted as a presumed father. Subdivision c allows an alleged father and other specified persons to bring an action to determine only the existence, not the nonexistence, of the parent-child relationship in cases where the child has no presumed father. The trial court granted a motion to quash the paternity petition due to a lack of standing, but also determined that petitioner was not the presumed father. All doubts as to whether any material, triable issues of fact exist are to be resolved in favor of the party opposing summary judgment. He was in Saudi Arabia when Fouad was conceived and born. At the time, they had a seven-year-old daughter named Suna.
|License:||For Personal Use Only|
|iPhone 5, 5S resolutions||640×1136|
|iPhone 6, 6S resolutions||750×1334|
|iPhone 7, 7 Plus, 8, 8 Plus resolutions||1080×1920|
|Android Mobiles HD resolutions||360×640, 540×960, 720×1280|
|Android Mobiles Full HD resolutions||1080×1920|
|Mobiles HD resolutions||480×800, 768×1280|
|Mobiles QHD, iPhone X resolutions||1440×2560|
|HD resolutions||1280×720, 1366×768, 1600×900, 1920×1080, 2560×1440, Original|
A triable issue of material fact exists “if, and only if, the evidence would allow a reasonable trier of fact to find the underlying fact in favor of the party opposing the motion in accordance with the applicable standard of proof. Scott Specialty Gases, Inc.
It did not arise in the context of a summary judgment motion and there was no issue raised about the inability of a petitioner to rely on the other party’s declarations.
The parties have confined their analysis to presumed father status under subdivision dwhich jegzn discuss in detail post. If the jegah of a statute is clear, we should not add to or alter 3v to accomplish a purpose which does not appear on the face of the statute or from its legislative history.
They do not cite to any particular page or quote any particular language from that decision, and otherwise fail to discuss or analyze its facts and holding. They also vacationed together, including time spent with appellant’s family. Respondents apparently base their contention on that passage, concluding that under Robert J.
Section provides for actions to determine the existence or nonexistence of a father and child relationship, and also defines who may bring such actions. In doing so, the plaintiff cannot rely on the mere allegations or denial 3dd her pleadings, “but, instead, shall jehan forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists Appellant leased or bought homes for them, and visited them at those homes. Miller 64 Cal.
The term “interested party” includes alleged fathers id. Once an interested party alleges facts which, if true, would bring him within sectionsubdivision dhe has standing under sectionsubdivision d and is entitled to a determination on the merits.
Summary judgment is granted when a moving party establishes the right to the entry of judgment as a matter of law.
Miller’s holding in regard to the petitioner’s failure to prove his presumed father status had to do with the merits of the action, not his standing to bring it in the first place.
According jehan appellant, he learned at some unspecified time that he was listed as Fouad’s father on Fouad’s birth certificate.
RGM Jegan | RGM Jegan features: – Rigging bones and gl… | Flickr
He and Jegan separated in hegan, and their divorce became final in December While the appellate court must review a summary judgment motion by the same standards as the trial court, it must independently determine as a matter of law the construction and effect of the facts presented.
Jegan said in a declaration that despite their divorce, she and appellant continued their marital relationship for many years, with appellant providing financial support for her, Fouad, and Suna. Fuss involved standing and other issues under the predecessor version of sectionsubdivision awhere a man sought to determine the existence of paternity. He never authorized Jegan to do so.
Said v. Jegan, Cal. App. 4th , 53 Cal. Rptr. 3d –
In reviewing an order granting summary judgment, we must assume the role of the trial court and redetermine the merits of the motion. Jaffe, Beverly Hills, and Aimee H.
He and Jegan did not live together or have sexual relations after their divorce. At the time, they had a seven-year-old daughter named Suna. Librers, supra, at pp. To the extent we interpret a statute based on undisputed facts, we are not bound by the trial court’s interpretation, and instead decide the correct meaning as a matter of law. Schwartz and Larry M. The plaintiff in Miller sought to establish that he was the presumed father of a child, pursuant to sectionsubdivision d and sectionsubdivision b.
We doubt its application here, where appellant must disavow paternity, but also allege facts showing there is a basis for claiming he is a presumed father.
CourtListener is jjegan project of Free Law Projecta federally-recognized c 3 non-profit. Sectionsubdivision b provides: As part of the comment about actions to determine paternity under subdivisions b and cthe Robert J. The declarations of the party opposing summary judgment, however, are liberally construed to determine the existence of triable issues of fact.