Gregory v. McLemore
899 P.2d 1189 (1995)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A putative father has standing to bring a paternity action to overcome the marital presumption of paternity when he can establish a competing statutory presumption of paternity, such as through cohabitation with the mother or a high-probability genetic test. The marital presumption is rebuttable, not conclusive, and a court has jurisdiction to resolve such conflicting presumptions.
Facts:
- Teresa Kay McLemore was in a common law marriage with Paul McLemore.
- While married to Paul McLemore, Teresa Kay McLemore resided with Jack Richard Gregory.
- A child, Paul Wayne McLemore, was conceived while Gregory and Teresa Kay McLemore were residing together.
- The child was born on June 13, 1994, during Teresa Kay McLemore's marriage to Paul McLemore.
- On November 28, 1994, blood testing established a 99.71% probability that Gregory is the child's biological father.
- Teresa Kay McLemore and Paul McLemore later divorced, and their divorce decree stated that the child was born 'of the said marriage.'
Procedural Posture:
- Jack Richard Gregory filed a 'Petition for Paternity' in the trial court.
- Teresa Kay McLemore filed a motion to dismiss, alleging Gregory lacked standing and the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.
- The trial court granted McLemore's motion and dismissed Gregory's petition.
- Gregory (Appellant) appealed the trial court's dismissal to the Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a putative father who has a statutory presumption of paternity based on cohabitation and genetic testing have legal standing to bring a paternity action for a child born during the mother's marriage to another man?
Opinions:
Majority - Carl B. Jones
Yes, a putative father with a statutory presumption of paternity has standing to bring a paternity action for a child born during the mother's marriage to another man. Oklahoma statutes create multiple presumptions of paternity. The mother's husband, Paul McLemore, is entitled to a presumption because the child was born during the marriage (10 O.S. § 2(A)(1)). However, the appellant, Gregory, is also entitled to two separate presumptions: one based on his alleged cohabitation with the mother during the period of conception (§ 2(A)(2)) and another based on the genetic test results showing over 95% probability of paternity (§ 2(A)(5)). State law expressly allows a 'putative father' to challenge a presumption of paternity (§ 3). Because Gregory has established a statutory presumption of paternity, he has standing. The marital presumption is not irrebuttable, and the court has subject matter jurisdiction to resolve these conflicting statutory presumptions. Furthermore, the prior divorce decree does not bar Gregory's action because he was not a party to that proceeding and the decree did not definitively adjudicate his parental rights.
Analysis:
This case clarifies that the common law marital presumption of paternity, while strong, is not an insurmountable barrier in the face of modern statutory schemes and scientific evidence. The decision establishes that competing statutory presumptions, particularly those based on genetic testing, grant a putative father standing to challenge the legal status of a child born into an existing marriage. This ruling reflects a broader legal trend prioritizing the determination of biological reality over the preservation of a legal fiction about parentage within marriage. It ensures that biological fathers have a procedural pathway to assert their parental rights, significantly impacting family law litigation involving third-party paternity claims.
Unlock the full brief for Gregory v. McLemore