Cases from cite.case.law:

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT APPROVED FAMILY LAW FORMS- A AND B, 246 So. 3d 1121 (Fla. 2018)

. . . testing which he disregarded; or f. signed a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity as provided by section 742.10 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, v. AUGUSTIN,, 237 So. 3d 1123 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Augustin's paternity to the child, Farouto Augustin, Jr., (born 11/15/2006) as a matter of law under section 742.10 . . .

IN INTEREST OF Y. R- P. a J. R- P. v. Ad M. H. O. R., 228 So. 3d 628 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Yet, it concluded that the case presented an issue within the scope of section 742.10(4), which allows . . . 742.18 does not preclude an individual “from challenging a paternity determination, pursuant to s. 742.10 . . . may be challenged on the grounds of “fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact” by a “challenger.” § 742.10 . . . Nothing in section 742.10(4) precludes a child’s biological father from proceeding as a challenger. . . . Section 742.10(4) opens an avenue for O.R. to challenge paternity. . . .

RDA CONSTRUCTION CORP. v. UNITED STATES,, 132 Fed. Cl. 732 (Fed. Cl. 2017)

. . . DX 742.10 (photograph of the wharf taken on May 19, 2008, prior to the June 4 and June 11, 2009 site . . . DX 742.10 (photograph of the wharf taken on May 19, 2008, prior to the June 4 and June 11, 2009 site . . .

ANDERSON, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE o b o DAVIS,, 202 So. 3d 966 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . .”); § 742.10(1), Fla. . . .

BAKER, v. TUNNEY,, 201 So. 3d 1235 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . as a “parent” in Florida, the father must be adjudicated the biological parent pursuant to section 742.10 . . .

A. D. A. M. J. L. v. D. M. F., 204 So.3d 523 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . .” § 742.10(4), Fla. Stat. (2010). . . . As described in section 742.10(1), Florida Statutes (2010), this Acknowledgement was a “nota-xized voluntary . . . Section 742.10(1) provides that, for a child born out of wedlock, where two parties file a “voluntary . . . If the Acknowledgment was fraudulent, there would'be no section 742.10(1) presumption' of paternity. . . . In that case, a man filed an acknowledgement of paternity pursuant to section 742.10(1), apparently with . . .

C. ROSE, v. SONSON Co- R., 208 So. 3d 136 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . .; see § 742.10, Fla. . . .

STATE v. L. CEASAR, Jr., 188 So. 3d 989 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . .” § 742.10(4), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . . Ceasar has not pled a basis to disestablish paternity under either § 742.10(4) or § 742.18. . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, o b o TORRES, v. SPRAGGS,, 213 So. 3d 959 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . .” § 742.10(4), Fla. Stat. (2015). . . . clear that the father did not plead any basis to contest or disestablish paternity under subsection 742.10 . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT REVENUE CORBITT, v. ALLETAG,, 156 So. 3d 1110 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . paternity affidavit on the birth certificate due to fraud, duress, or a material mistake of fact, § 742.10 . . .

J. A. I. J. K. C. v. B. R., 160 So. 3d 473 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 742.10(1), Florida Statutes (2012), provides for procedures to be used in determining paternity . . . Section 742.10(4) provides that after sixty days have passed since the voluntary acknowledgment of paternity . . . June 26, 2012, and his amended petition on June 17, 2014, after the sixty-day time period in section 742.10 . . . acknowledgment of paternity on April 20, 2012, and the expiration of the sixty-day time period in section 742.10 . . . paternity or by the filing of affidavits or stipulation acknowledging paternity as provided in section 742.10 . . .

FLORES, v. SANCHEZ,, 137 So. 3d 1104 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Flores to submit to paternity testing arises from an action filed by the Mother pursuant to section 742.10 . . . Section 742.10(1) gives the individuals named on a birth certifícate sixty days to rescind the voluntary . . . See § 742.10(4) (“After the 60-day period referred to in subsection (1), the signed voluntary acknowledgment . . . whether the Mother can meet her burden of establishing either fraud or duress as required by section 742.10 . . . Flores’ paternity under section 742.10(4) on the basis of fraud and duress, the Mother, at this point . . .

C. G. v. J. R. J. R., 130 So. 3d 776 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . The court noted that section 742.10 provided the proper procedure for determining paternity for “children . . . Id. at 1385 (quoting §§ 742.011, 742.10). . . .

D. M. T. v. T. M. H., 129 So. 3d 320 (Fla. 2013)

. . . See, e.g., § 742.10, Fla. Stat; ch. 63, Fla. Stat. . . .

VAN WEELDE, v. VAN WEELDE,, 110 So. 3d 918 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . proceeding to establish a support order, in which the signatory is a party, whichever is earlier. § 742.10 . . . basis of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact, with the burden of proof upon the challenger.” § 742.10 . . . proceedings are not required or permitted to ratify an unchallenged acknowl-edgement of paternity.” § 742.10 . . . Nothing in either section 382.013(2)(c) or section 742.10 requires that the person signing the voluntary . . . She points to section 742.10(4), which provides that a voluntary Acknowledgement of Paternity creates . . .

J. T. J. v. N. H. E. R., 84 So. 3d 1176 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . .” § 742.10(1), Fla. Stat. . . .

J. C. J. v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT ON REVENUE, O. S. B., 80 So. 3d 1106 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . See § 742.10(1) (“[I]f an affidavit acknowledging paternity or stipulation of paternity is executed by . . .

UNIVERSAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, v. WARFEL,, 82 So. 3d 47 (Fla. 2012)

. . . (emphasis supplied)); § 742.10(1), Fla. . . .

T. M. H. v. D. M. T., 79 So. 3d 787 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . the statutory vehicle by which paternity is established for children born out of wedlock, see section 742.10 . . .

P. G. v. E. W., 75 So. 3d 777 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . See § 742.10(1) (“[I]f ... a voluntary acknowledgment of paternity that is witnessed by two individuals . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, REYES, v. KATHCART,, 67 So. 3d 442 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . Acknowledgement of Paternity form, legal paternity has been established pursuant to Florida Statute section 742.10 . . .

SLOWINSKI v. M. SWEENEY,, 64 So. 3d 128 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . In addition, section 742.10, Florida Statutes (2010), states paternity proceedings should be brought . . .

STATE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CARNLEY, v. LYNCH,, 53 So. 3d 1154 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2011)

. . . asserting that he has not acknowledged his fatherhood in an affidavit executed in conformity with section 742.10 . . . have existed for genetic testing under these facts if Lynch had instituted proceedings under section 742.10 . . . Specifically, a party may disestablish paternity under section 742.10(4) “on the basis of fraud, duress . . . mistake of fact, or newly discovered evidence that would have disestablished paternity under section 742.10 . . .

MOHORN, v. THOMAS, 30 So. 3d 710 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . See § 742.10(1), Fla. Stat. . . . Section 742.10 sets forth varying ways in which paternity may be established and provides, in relevant . . . proceeding to establish a support order, in which the signatory is a party, whichever is earlier. § 742.10 . . . and may be challenged in court only on the basis of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact.” § 742.10 . . . See § 742.10(4), (5), Fla. Stat.; State, Dep’t of Revenue ex rel. Chambers v. . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, BARNES, v. J. SWATTS,, 988 So. 2d 1284 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . court essentially construed the respondent’s hand-written pro se request for DNA testing as a section 742.10 . . . handwritten unsworn letter to the lower court does not constitute a lawful challenge under section 742.10 . . .

ALLISON, v. MEDLOCK,, 983 So. 2d 789 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . . § 742.10(1), Fla. Stat. For approximately four years, Allison has been treated as the father. . . . disestablish paternity are fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact, and she bears the burden of proof. § 742.10 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE M. SHARIF, v. J. BROWN, Jr., 980 So. 2d 590 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . or that he had not acknowledged his fatherhood in an affidavit executed in conformity with section 742.10 . . .

JOHNSTON, v. JOHNSTON, n k a, 979 So. 2d 337 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . 1.540, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, or from challenging a paternity determination pursuant to s. 742.10 . . . 160-61 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (finding that a paternity determination could be challenged under section 742.10 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CHAMBERS, v. D. TRAVIS,, 971 So. 2d 157 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . duly notarized affidavit established a “rebuttable presumption ... of paternity” pursuant to section 742.10 . . . proceeding to establish a support order, in which the signatory is a party, whichever is earlier. § 742.10 . . . See §§ 742.10(4), 742.18, Fla. Stat. (2007). . . . A signed voluntary acknowledgment of paternity that establishes paternity pursuant to section 742.10( . . . A challenge may be brought on these grounds under section 742.10(4), whether or not all the requirements . . .

FERNANDEZ, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CHILD SUPPORT,, 971 So. 2d 875 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . notice, however, any dispute regarding his previously-admitted paternity was governed by subsection 742.10 . . .

HEART OF ADOPTIONS, INC. v. J. A., 963 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 2007)

. . . This result harmonizes the adoption statutes and section 742.10, which establishes that chapter 742 “ . . . jurisdiction and procedures for the determination of paternity for children born out of wedlock.” § 742.10 . . . Section 742.10(1), Florida Statutes (2005), states that “[t]his chapter provides the primary jurisdiction . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, o b o T. E. P. v. PRICE,, 958 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Under section 742.10(1), Florida Statutes (2006), out-of-wedlock paternity can be established through . . . sixty-day period, the paternity may be challenged only for fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact. § 742.10 . . . As a result, under section 742.10(4), Mr. . . .

WILLIAMS- RAYMOND, v. JONES,, 954 So. 2d 721 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 742.10(1), Fla. . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, OFFICE OF CHILD SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT, v. E. DUCTANT,, 957 So. 2d 658 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . See § 742.10(4), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . verified motion for relief from “child support order” and sought to invoke both rule 1.540 and section 742.10 . . . father of the minor child” because Ductant failed to prove entitlement to relief under either section 742.10 . . . Section 742.10, in pertinent part, provides: (1) ... . . . . § 742.10(1), (4), Fla. Stat. (2004). . . .

T. B. v. M. M., 945 So. 2d 637 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . We conclude that the provisions of section 742.10(1) are more applicable to these proceedings than those . . . Section 742.10(1) explains that chapter 742 “provides the primary jurisdiction and procedures for the . . .

In ADOPTION OF BABY A. a A. S. v. A. S. v., 944 So. 2d 380 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . See § 742.10(1), Fla. Stat. (2004). . . . jurisdiction and procedures for the determination of paternity for children born out of wedlock,” § 742.10 . . . See § 742.10(1). . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, o b o PRESTON, v. CUMMINGS, o b o L. v. J. II, o b o M. v. J. o b o v. o b o v. O. III, o b o v. E., 871 So. 2d 1055 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . .” § 742.10, Fla. Stat. (2002). . . .

T. J. v. DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES,, 860 So. 2d 517 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . See § 742.10(1), Fla. Stat. (2002); P.N.V. v. Wash, exrel. . . .

AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA FAMILY LAW RULES OF PROCEDURE AND FAMILY LAW FORMS, 810 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2000)

. . . 61.052(7), sections 61.13(9) or (10), section 742.031(3), sections 742.032(l)-(3), and/or sections 742.10 . . .

S. D. v. A. G. J. G., 764 So. 2d 807 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . See § 742.10, Fla. Stat. (1997). The child in this case was not born out of wedlock. . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE By L. MARTIN, v. L. BRADLEY, v., 774 So. 2d 721 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . only be challenged on the basis of fraud, duress, or material mistake of fact as indicated in section 742.10 . . . Because section 742.10(4) permits a paternity challenge on this basis, the Department has failed to show . . .

MUNIZ, v. STATE, 764 So. 2d 729 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . See § 742.10(1), Fla. . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE R. A. E. v. M. L. S., 756 So. 2d 125 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . See § 742.10, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1992); ch. 92-138, § 28, Laws of Fla. . . . See § 742.10, Fla. Stat'. (Supp.1986). . . . See § 742.10, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1986). . . . See § 742.10, Fla. Stat. (1992). . . . See § 742.10, Fla. Stat. (Supp.1992); ch. 92-138, § 28, Laws of Fla. . Cf. . . . See § 742.10(1), Fla. Stat. (1999). . . .

AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA FAMILY LAW FORMS, 759 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 1999)

. . . 61.052(7), sections 61.13(9) or (10), section 742.031(3), sections 742.032(1)B(3), and/or sections 742.10 . . .

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE E. MEIRE, v. A. BANDER,, 734 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . In support of the dismissal, Bander cites sections 742.10(1), 12(2), and 12(3), and argues that birth . . .

CONTINO, A. v. In ESTATE OF A. CONTINO,, 714 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . The majority opinion relies on section 742.10, Florida Statutes (1997), but that statute does not support . . . Section 742.10 applies in a determination of paternity for a child born out of wedlock. . . . May 1997, Greg Contino filed a Petition for Authorization of DNA Blood Typing, pursuant to sections 742.10 . . . probate court erred by denying his petition for authorization for DNA blood typing, pursuant to sections 742.10 . . . Section 742.10, Florida Statutes (1997), entitled “Establishment of paternity for children born out of . . .

I. A. v. H. H., 710 So. 2d 162 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . paternity or by the filing of affidavits or stipulation acknowledging paternity as provided in section 742.10 . . .

CAMPO a k a v. L. TAFUR,, 704 So. 2d 730 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . . § 742.10, Fla. Stat. (1995). . . .

J. HOLMEN, G. J. O. J. G. v. HOLMEN, RAHN,, 697 So. 2d 866 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Appellants contend that it created only a rebuttable presumption of paternity pursuant to section 742.10 . . . They relied on section 742.10(1), Florida Statutes which provides: (1) This chapter provides the primary . . . acknowledgment of paternity shall create a rebuttable presumption as defined by s. 90.304, of paternity ... § 742.10 . . . Both the supreme court and first district pointed out that section 742.10(1), which we set forth above . . .

G. F. C. v. S. G. D. G., 686 So. 2d 1382 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . statutory provision must be read in conjunction with the remainder of Chapter 742, including section 742.10 . . . paternity or by the filing of affidavits or stipulation acknowledging paternity as provided in section 742.10 . . .

In ESTATE OF W. SMITH, S. WILSON, v. I. SCRUGGS,, 685 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 1996)

. . . Section 742.10, Florida Statutes (1991), confirms this, providing in part: 742.10 Establishment of paternity . . .

L. KRANZ, v. KRANZ,, 661 So. 2d 876 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . .” § 742.10, Fla.Stat. (1991). The child in this case was bom to married parents who then divorced. . . .

P. N. V. v. STATE OF WASHINGTON, T. R. D., 654 So. 2d 1274 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . Maith, 435 So.2d 387 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); § 742.10, Fla.Stat. (1993). . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, D. A. R. v. C. M. N., 661 So. 2d 22 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . his paternity for the child by affidavit or stipulation with the mother in accordance with section 742.10 . . . proceedings in such cases shall be sealed against public inspection in the interests of the child. . § 742.10 . . .

In ESTATE OF W. SMITH, I. SCRUGGS, v. S. WILSON Co- H. H. C. G. O. S., 640 So. 2d 1152 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . . § 742.10, Fla.Stat. (1991) (e.s.). . . .

WOMACK, v. COOK,, 634 So. 2d 322 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . In this case, pursuant to section 742.10, Florida Statutes, in 1988 the mother’s then husband, Randy . . . result of an “adjudicatory proceeding”, it merely created a rebuttable presumption of paternity. (§ 742.10 . . . I submit that the “rebuttable presumption” provision contained in section 742.10, Florida Statutes was . . . Berry of any parental responsibilities under his affidavit filed pursuant to section 742.10 and section . . .

DENNIS, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES,, 566 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . The first sentence of section 742.10 states that chapter relates to the determination of paternity for . . . Section 742.10, Florida Statutes. . Section 742.011, Florida Statutes. . . . .

W. ROGERS v. L. K. RUNNELS,, 448 So. 2d 530 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . This right may be enforced by a paternity suit under section 742.10, Florida Statutes (1975), which is . . .

HODGE, v. MAITH,, 435 So. 2d 387 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . See also § 742.10, Florida Statutes, which provides: This chapter shall be in lieu of any other proceedings . . .

IN ESTATE ODOM, D. BERKEY, v. ESTATE ODOM,, 397 So. 2d 420 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Section 742.10 provides that chapter 742 is “in lieu of” all other proceedings provided By law for the . . . question then is, does a cause of action still exist in light of the “in lieu of” language of section 742.10 . . . action brought for “the determination of paternity and support of children born out of wedlock.” § 742.10 . . . exclusiveness of the remedy provided for the natural mother by the “in lieu of” language of section 742.10 . . .

In ESTATE OF S. DONOYAN, a k a S. WILBURN, a k a v. DONOYAN, S. a k a S., 393 So. 2d 615 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Everheart, 390 So.2d 53 (Fla.1980), that § 742.10 is limited in its application to suits brought by a . . .

KENDRICK, v. EVERHEART a k a, 390 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 1980)

. . . The court, noting in particular section 742.10, held that chapter 742 provides the jurisdictional basis . . . declaratory judgment depends primarily upon the significance of the following language from section 742.10 . . . We do not, however, read section 742.10 to preclude a putative father from bringing a declaratory judgment . . . legislature intended such a result and, therefore, we construe the “in lieu of” language of section 742.10 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, GILLESPIE, v. WEST,, 378 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 1979)

. . . This right may be enforced by a paternity suit under section 742.10, Florida Statutes (1975), which • . . .

BELL, v. E. SETZER,, 375 So. 2d 61 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . Section 742.10, Florida Statutes (1977). . . .

ESTANISLAO, Jr. v. STATE DEPT. OF HRS, HULL,, 368 So. 2d 677 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1979)

. . . . § 742.10 provides as follows: “This chapter shall be in lieu of any other proceedings provided by law . . .

FORD, v. LOEFFLER,, 363 So. 2d 23 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . See especially Section 742.10, Florida Statutes [1977]. . . .

GAMMON, v. COBB,, 335 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 1976)

. . . (Emphasis supplied) Also, § 742.10, Florida Statutes, providing: “This chapter shall be in lieu of any . . . In law — although the Legislature declared in § 742.10, Florida Statutes, that the chapter is in lieu . . . effect, was a “proceeding to determine paternity” under the Workmen’s Compensation Act not barred by § 742.10 . . .

PINKNEY, a W. v. PINKNEY,, 198 So. 2d 52 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1967)

. . . 742 as applied to suits of paternity and support for bastard children by pointing out that: “Section 742.10 . . .

F. CLARKE, v. Ed BLACKBURN, Jr., 151 So. 2d 325 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1963)

. . . Section 742.10 provides that that Chapter shall be in lieu of any other proceedings provided by law for . . .

SANDERS, v. YANCEY,, 122 So. 2d 202 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1960)

. . . See §§ 742.011, 742.031 and 742.10, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.; Ex parte Hayes, 25 Fla. 279, 6 So. 64; Gossett . . .

ARMSTRONG v. M. SNOWDEN,, 107 So. 2d 619 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1958)

. . . See §§ 742.011, 742.031 and 742.10, Fla.Stat., F.S.A.; Ex parte Hayes, 25 Fla. 279, 6 So. 64; Gossett . . .