16 Florida opinions name it 2 courts 1987–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
DEPT. OF HEALTH & REHAB. SERVICES v. Privettegreen2 sentences2025Before ordering a paternity test where the child already has a legal father, the Florida Supreme Court held, a trial court must require the party seeking the paternity test to prove by “clear and convincing evidence” that the test is in the child’s best interest – not merely that the test might establish 7 a biological link.1 Privette, 617 So. 2d at 308 . 2002In determining whether the father wishes to appear, the supreme court notes that the legal father must be given notice of the paternity hearing "either actually if he is available or constructively if otherwise." Id. at 308, n. 4 . | 2 | 5 |
Nostrand v. Olivierigreen1 sentence2018See L.J. v. A.S., 25 So. 3d 1284, 1288-89 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Van Nostrand v. Olivieri, 427 So. 2d 374, 377 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). | 1 | 1 |
Lj v. Asgreen1 sentence2018See L.J. v. A.S., 25 So. 3d 1284, 1288-89 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Van Nostrand v. Olivieri, 427 So. 2d 374, 377 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). | 1 | 1 |
STATE, DEPT. OF REVENUE v. Travisgreen1 sentence2016Chambers v. Travis, 971 So.2d 157, 162 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007), this Court quashed a trial court’s paternity test order after .finding that a legal father’s request for testing, merely in order “to be sure” that he was the child’s biological father before being required to pay child support, failed to constitute good cause. | 1 | 1 |
Jackson v. Stategreen1 sentence2012See Hebner v. Barry, 834 So.2d 305 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (reversing trial court’s order that putative father undergo blood testing where trial court failed to make findings of fact in regard to whether the paternity test was in best interests of the child); Lander, 906 So.2d at 1135 (remanding for a hearing in a case where the putative father brought the paternity action, and directing that the best interests of the child be considered). | 1 | 1 |
Lander v. Smithgreen1 sentence2012See Hebner v. Barry, 834 So.2d 305 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (reversing trial court’s order that putative father undergo blood testing where trial court failed to make findings of fact in regard to whether the paternity test was in best interests of the child); Lander, 906 So.2d at 1135 (remanding for a hearing in a case where the putative father brought the paternity action, and directing that the best interests of the child be considered). | 1 | 1 |
State, Department of Revenue ex rel. Brinson v. Brinsongreen1 sentence2010See State, Dep’t of Revenue v. Brinson, 953 So.2d 38 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (noting that section 742.18 “requires the man to file a court petition within ninety days of obtaining a paternity test”). | 1 | 1 |
Barker v. Barkergreen1 sentence2003See R.S.R. v. A.K., 801 So.2d 325 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)(citing Barker v. Barker, 785 So.2d 1273 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)). | 1 | 1 |
R.S.R. v. A.K.green1 sentence2003See R.S.R. v. A.K., 801 So.2d 325 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)(citing Barker v. Barker, 785 So.2d 1273 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)). | 1 | 1 |
Daniel v. Danielgreen1 sentence2000See Daniel v. Daniel, 695 So.2d 1253, 1254 (Fla.1997)(holding that a child remains legitimate as long as he or she was born during a valid marriage), approving 681 So.2d 849 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); see also, Judge R. | 1 | 1 |
Daniel v. Danielgreen1 sentence2000See Daniel v. Daniel, 695 So.2d 1253, 1254 (Fla.1997)(holding that a child remains legitimate as long as he or she was born during a valid marriage), approving 681 So.2d 849 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); see also, Judge R. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ferradaz v. Ortiz
green
1 sentence2012See Daniel; Ferradaz v. Ortiz, 754 So.2d 867 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Benac v. Bree
green
1 sentence2001The mother defended against his request for custody by claiming that another individual was the biological father. [1] The second district quashed the trial court's order to submit to a paternity test stating that the test ordered was premature "because the circuit court has not yet received any evidence as to what the child's interest may be." Id. at 538 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
STATE, DHRS, OFF. OF CHILD SUP. ENFORCEMENT EX REL. RICKS v. Ricks
green
1 sentence1997In Ricks the Second District held that section 742.011, Florida Statutes, allows a paternity action to be brought by a child or other person only if there has been no previous adjudication of the merits of the paternity claim. 530 So.2d at 371 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Lalli v. Lalli
green
2 sentences1996To- adopt the view of the court below would mean that in every instance a paternity claim could be strategically delayed until the death of the putative father, thereby depriving him of the opportunity to deny the claim. 3 See Lalli v. Lalli 439 U.S. 259 , 99 S.Ct. 518 , 58 L.Ed.2d 503 (1978) (in upholding New York statute which allowed inheritance by illegitimate child only if paternity order had never been entered during child’s lifetime, Court expressed concern with the availability of the putative father as a substantial factor contributing to the fact-finding process). 1996To- adopt the view of the court below would mean that in every instance a paternity claim could be strategically delayed until the death of the putative father, thereby depriving him of the opportunity to deny the claim. 3 See Lalli v. Lalli 439 U.S. 259 , 99 S.Ct. 518 , 58 L.Ed.2d 503 (1978) (in upholding New York statute which allowed inheritance by illegitimate child only if paternity order had never been entered during child’s lifetime, Court expressed concern with the availability of the putative father as a substantial factor contributing to the fact-finding process). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
In Re Estate of Greenwood
green
2 sentences1996Scruggs relies on In re Estate of Greenwood, 402 Pa.Super. 536 , 587 A.2d 749 (1991), appeal denied, 529 Pa. 634 , 600 A.2d 953 (1991), and 529 Pa. 634 , 600 A.2d 954 (1991), which held that the statute of limitations for paternity actions did not apply to adjudications of paternity in probate for the purpose of proving heirship. 1996Scruggs relies on In re Estate of Greenwood, 402 Pa.Super. 536 , 587 A.2d 749 (1991), appeal denied, 529 Pa. 634 , 600 A.2d 953 (1991), and 529 Pa. 634 , 600 A.2d 954 (1991), which held that the statute of limitations for paternity actions did not apply to adjudications of paternity in probate for the purpose of proving heirship. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Walker v. Walker
neutral
1 sentence1987Cf. Kendrick v. Everheart, 390 So.2d 53 (Fla.1980); State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. West, 378 So.2d 1220 (Fla.1979); Gammon v. Cobb, 335 So.2d 261 (Fla.1976); Walker v. Walker, 266 So.2d 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Gammon v. Cobb
green
1 sentence1987Cf. Kendrick v. Everheart, 390 So.2d 53 (Fla.1980); State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. West, 378 So.2d 1220 (Fla.1979); Gammon v. Cobb, 335 So.2d 261 (Fla.1976); Walker v. Walker, 266 So.2d 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Kendrick v. Everheart
green
1 sentence1987Cf. Kendrick v. Everheart, 390 So.2d 53 (Fla.1980); State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. West, 378 So.2d 1220 (Fla.1979); Gammon v. Cobb, 335 So.2d 261 (Fla.1976); Walker v. Walker, 266 So.2d 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
STATE DEPT. OF HEALTH, ETC. v. West
green
1 sentence1987Cf. Kendrick v. Everheart, 390 So.2d 53 (Fla.1980); State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. West, 378 So.2d 1220 (Fla.1979); Gammon v. Cobb, 335 So.2d 261 (Fla.1976); Walker v. Walker, 266 So.2d 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972). | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.