Leger v. Leger
215 So. 3d 773 (2015)
Rule of Law:
The bad faith deception exception that extends the time limit for a biological father to file a paternity action under Louisiana Civil Code article 198 applies only when the mother deceives the father regarding the fact of his paternity, not when she deceives him about the potential consequences of revealing his paternity.
Facts:
- Michael Leger and Danielle Leger were married in 2007.
- In the fall of 2011, Danielle Leger had an affair with John Jerome Fontenot, a local veterinarian, and became pregnant.
- Danielle gave birth to a daughter, Gracelynn Leger, on August 21, 2012, while still married to Michael Leger.
- In October 2012, Dr. Fontenot submitted to a DNA test which indicated a 99.99% probability that he was Gracelynn's biological father.
- Danielle allegedly told Dr. Fontenot that she and Gracelynn would be in physical danger if her husband, Michael, learned that Dr. Fontenot was the father.
- Michael and Danielle separated in August 2013.
- Michael Leger first became aware of the affair and that he might not be Gracelynn's biological father in March 2014.
Procedural Posture:
- Michael Leger filed a petition for divorce against Danielle Leger in a state trial court in May 2014.
- John Jerome Fontenot filed a Petition for Intervention in the divorce proceeding, seeking to establish his paternity of the child, Gracelynn.
- In response, Michael Leger filed a Peremptory Exception of Peremption, arguing that Dr. Fontenot's paternity action was filed too late under the law.
- The trial court heard arguments on the exception and granted it, ruling that Dr. Fontenot's paternity action was precluded by Louisiana Civil Code article 198.
- Dr. Fontenot (Appellant) appealed the trial court's judgment to the Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.
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 the bad faith deception exception in Louisiana Civil Code article 198, which extends the peremptive period for a paternity action, apply when a mother's alleged deception concerns the potential physical danger of revealing the biological father's paternity rather than the fact of his paternity itself?
Opinions:
Majority - Savoie, Judge
No. The bad faith deception exception does not apply because the statutory language is clear and unambiguous. The exception in Louisiana Civil Code article 198 is triggered only if 'the mother in bad faith deceived the father of the child regarding his paternity.' In this case, there was no evidence that Danielle Leger deceived Dr. Fontenot about the fact that he was the father; indeed, a DNA test confirmed his paternity just two months after the child's birth. Deception regarding the potential consequences of disclosing paternity does not fall within the narrow scope of the statutory exception. Furthermore, even if the exception did apply, the action would still be untimely because it was not filed within one year from when Dr. Fontenot knew of his paternity (October 2012).
Analysis:
This decision strictly construes the statutory exception for filing a paternity action concerning a child presumed to be the child of the mother's husband. It establishes that the exception for 'bad faith deception' is limited solely to misrepresentations about the biological fact of paternity. The ruling reinforces the strong legal presumption of legitimacy for children born during a marriage and prioritizes the finality provided by peremptive periods over equitable arguments, even when a biological father's delay is based on fears for the child's safety. This case serves as a clear warning to biological fathers that the one-year clock to establish paternity is rigid and will not be tolled by threats or deceptions unrelated to the core issue of biological fatherhood.
Gunnerbot
AI-powered case assistant
Loaded: Leger v. Leger (2015)
Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"