paternity test in Illinois

2017Id. at 454 . ¶ 34 We agree with Joanna and answer the first certified question as follows: The Parentage Act’s limitations on declaring the nonexistence of a parent-child relationship 4 apply in a probate proceeding to determine heirship where a party is seeking to declare the nonexistence of the decedent’s parent-child relationship with his presumed child. ¶ 35 We first note that the Probate Act does not speak to the determination of parentage.

2017Id. at 454 . ¶ 34 We agree with Joanna and answer the first certified question as follows: The Parentage Act’s limitations on declaring the nonexistence of a parent-child relationship 4 apply in a probate proceeding to determine heirship where a party is seeking to declare the nonexistence of the decedent’s parent-child relationship with his presumed child. ¶ 35 We first note that the Probate Act does not speak to the determination of parentage.

2002Little, 452 U.S. at 9-12 , 68 L.

2002Little, 452 U.S. at 9-12 , 68 L.

1996Draper, 250 Ill.App.3d at 659 , 190 Ill.Dec. at 336-37 , 621 N.E.2d at 205-06 .

1996Draper, 250 Ill.

2025On all four documents, respondent identified his address as the Sangamon Street Address. -2- 1-24-1353 Ultimately, respondent failed to appear on November 21, 2006, to present the motion requesting a paternity test and the circuit court struck the motion. ¶8 A. 2-1401 Petition ¶9 Then, on October 6, 2023, seventeen years after the Default Orders were entered, respondent filed a pro se “Petition to Declare Default Order of Parentage and Default Uniform Order for Support Entered on September 1, 2006 as Void Ab Initio” pursuant to section 2-1401 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, 735 ILCS 5

2025Everyone is presumed to know the law (Jones v. Board of Education of City of Chicago, 2013 IL App (1st) 122437, ¶ 22 ), and the jury presumably heard what a witness said on direct examination—but not everyone is presumed to know the results of a paternity test. ¶ 38 Even so, that difference would not altogether prevent a colorable comparison of - 12 - the present case to Williams, for the appellate court in Williams criticized the State not only for failing to prove the existence of the paternity test and the scheduling of the paternity hearing but also for failing to prove the defendant’s kno

2024Id. at 78 (citing In re Marriage of Halas, 173 Ill.

2023Allegis, 223 Ill. 2d at 334 . ¶ 34 Guy argues (1) that Miller had the right to file a paternity claim in 1985, when the 1984 Act took effect, and during the two years thereafter; (2) that, when Miller did not file a claim between 1985 and 1987, Guy obtained a vested interest in 1987 in the expiration of Miller’s paternity claim; and (3) that the 2015 Act deprived Guy of this interest. ¶ 35 Guy does not argue that he had a financial or monetary interest in denying that he fathered Miller but rather that he had intangible property interest, that the Illinois due process clause protects such an i

2022Devon M., 344 Ill.

1996Knox College, 88 Ill. 2d at 416 , 430 N.E.2d at 981 .

1996Knox College, 88 Ill. 2d at 416 , 430 N.E.2d at 981 .

1996O’Brien, 247 Ill.