Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 742.12 (2025)

Scientific testing to determine paternity.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

742.12 Scientific testing to determine paternity.—

(1) In any proceeding to establish paternity, the court on its own motion may require the child, mother, and alleged fathers to submit to scientific tests that are generally acceptable within the scientific community to show a probability of paternity. The court shall direct that the tests be conducted by a qualified technical laboratory.

(2) In any proceeding to establish paternity, the court may, upon request of a party providing a sworn statement or written declaration as provided by s. 92.525(2) alleging paternity and setting forth facts establishing a reasonable possibility of the requisite sexual contact between the parties or providing a sworn statement or written declaration denying paternity and setting forth facts establishing a reasonable possibility of the nonexistence of sexual contact between the parties, require the child, mother, and alleged fathers to submit to scientific tests that are generally acceptable within the scientific community to show a probability of paternity. The court shall direct that the tests be conducted by a qualified technical laboratory.

(3) The test results, together with the opinions and conclusions of the test laboratory, shall be filed with the court. Any objection to the test results must be made in writing and must be filed with the court at least 10 days prior to the hearing. If no objection is filed, the test results shall be admitted into evidence without the need for predicate to be laid or third-party foundation testimony to be presented. Nothing in this paragraph prohibits a party from calling an outside expert witness to refute or support the testing procedure or results, or the mathematical theory on which they are based. Upon the entry of the order for scientific testing, the court must inform each person to be tested of the procedure and requirements for objecting to the test results and of the consequences of the failure to object.

(4) Test results are admissible in evidence and should be weighed along with other evidence of the paternity of the alleged father unless the statistical probability of paternity equals or exceeds 95 percent. A statistical probability of paternity of 95 percent or more creates a rebuttable presumption, as defined by s. 90.304, that the alleged father is the biological father of the child. If a party fails to rebut the presumption of paternity which arose from the statistical probability of paternity of 95 percent or more, the court may enter a summary judgment of paternity. If the test results show the alleged father cannot be the biological father, the case shall be dismissed with prejudice.

(5) Subject to the limitations in subsection (3), if the test results or the expert analysis of the inherited characteristics is disputed, the court, upon reasonable request of a party, shall order that an additional test be made by the same laboratory or an independent laboratory at the expense of the party requesting additional testing.

(6) Verified documentation of the chain of custody of the blood or other specimens is competent evidence to establish the chain of custody.

(7) The fees and costs for scientific tests shall be paid by the parties in proportions and at times determined by the court unless the parties reach a stipulated agreement which is adopted by the court.

History.—s. 154, ch. 86-220; s. 10, ch. 89-183; s. 10, ch. 94-318; s. 72, ch. 97-170; s. 54, ch. 2001-158.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 59 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Universal Ins. Co. of North Am. v. Warfel, 82 So. 3d 47 (Fla. 2012).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Universal Ins. Co. of North Am. v. Warfel, 82 So. 3d 47 (Fla. 2012). · cites it 6× “3d DCA 1990) (citing § 742.12, Fla. Stat. (1989)); Jones v. Crawford, 552 So.”

Doe v. Suntrust Bank, 32 So. 3d 133 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). · cites it 28× “In support of her motion, Madelin cited *136 section 742.12, Florida Statutes (2005), [3] which provides for scientific testing in actions to determine paternity.”

Morris v. Crawford, 718 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). · cites it 19× “Section 742.12, Florida Statutes (1995), relied upon by the court in dismissing the cause, states in pertinent part: (2) The test results, together with the opinions and conclusions of the test laboratory, shall be filed with the court.”

Marshek v. Marshek, 599 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). · cites it 18× “, without mentioning section 742.12. Because the Fourth District did not consider the mandatory language of section 742.”

Dept. of Health & Rehab. Servs. v. Privette, 617 So. 2d 305 (Fla. 1993). · cites it 3× “However, for purposes of discovery, the legislature has established the public policy of Florida when it enacted section 742.12(1), Florida Statutes (1989), which provides in pertinent part: In any proceeding to establish paternity in law or in equity, the court on its own…”

State Dept. of Revenue v. Aguirre, 705 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). · cites it 20× “See § 742.12, Fla. Stat. (1989). Blood was drawn and submitted to Roche Biomedical Laboratories.”

Warfel v. Universal Ins. Co. of North Am., 36 So. 3d 136 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). · cites it 4× “3d DCA 1990) (explaining that the statutory presumption of paternity under section 742.12(1), Florida Statutes (1989), is a rebuttable presumption and the legislature specifically provided that it was governed by section 90.”

Ferguson v. Williams, 566 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). · cites it 7× “Section 742.12, Florida Statutes (1989), provides that HLA test results, "together with the opinions and conclusions of the test laboratory," are admissible in evidence "and should be weighed along with other evidence of the paternity of the alleged father unless the statistical…”

Amendments to the Florida Fam. Law Rules of Procedure & Fam. Law Forms, 810 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2000). · cites it 2× “I request, under section 742.12, Florida Statutes, that the Court enter an order for appropriate scientific testing of the biological samples of Petitioner and Respondent and the minor child(ren) listed below, so that a determination of paternity of the minor child(ren) can be…”

Jones v. Crawford, 552 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). · cites it 9× “Section 742.12, Florida Statutes, adopted effective October 1, 1986, [1] admittedly applicable in the proceedings below, provides, in pertinent part, as follows: The results of the Human Leukocyte Antigen tests or other scientific tests, together with the opinions and…”

Valdes v. Lambert, 568 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). · cites it 3× “Based upon the tests, affidavits supporting the regularity of the processing, and an affidavit of Lambert that she engaged in sexual intercourse with only Valdes and Lambert during the conception period, Lambert filed a motion for summary judgment on the issue of paternity…”

A.D.A. v. D.M.F., 204 So. 3d 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). · cites it 3× “§ 742.12(2), Fla. Stat. (2010). The boyfriend claimed he and the mother had an intimate relationship during, a time frame consistent with his paternity, but that the mother would not let him see the child.”

Show all 59 citing cases →

— 742.12(1) — 20 cases

Dept. of Health & Rehab. Servs. v. Privette, 617 So. 2d 305 (Fla. 1993). “However, for purposes of discovery, the legislature has established the public policy of Florida when it enacted section 742.12(1), Florida Statutes (1989), which provides in pertinent part: In any proceeding to establish paternity in law or in equity, the court on its own…”

Marshek v. Marshek, 599 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). “, without mentioning section 742.12. Because the Fourth District did not consider the mandatory language of section 742.”

Universal Ins. Co. of North Am. v. Warfel, 82 So. 3d 47 (Fla. 2012). “3d DCA 1990) (citing § 742.12, Fla. Stat. (1989)); Jones v. Crawford, 552 So.”

Doe v. Suntrust Bank, 32 So. 3d 133 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). “In support of her motion, Madelin cited *136 section 742.12, Florida Statutes (2005), [3] which provides for scientific testing in actions to determine paternity.”

Warfel v. Universal Ins. Co. of North Am., 36 So. 3d 136 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). “3d DCA 1990) (explaining that the statutory presumption of paternity under section 742.12(1), Florida Statutes (1989), is a rebuttable presumption and the legislature specifically provided that it was governed by section 90.”

— 742.12(2) — 14 cases

A.D.A. v. D.M.F., 204 So. 3d 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). “§ 742.12(2), Fla. Stat. (2010). The boyfriend claimed he and the mother had an intimate relationship during, a time frame consistent with his paternity, but that the mother would not let him see the child.”

Morris v. Crawford, 718 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). “Section 742.12, Florida Statutes (1995), relied upon by the court in dismissing the cause, states in pertinent part: (2) The test results, together with the opinions and conclusions of the test laboratory, shall be filed with the court.”

Marshek v. Marshek, 599 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). “, without mentioning section 742.12. Because the Fourth District did not consider the mandatory language of section 742.”

State Dept. of Revenue v. Aguirre, 705 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). “See § 742.12, Fla. Stat. (1989). Blood was drawn and submitted to Roche Biomedical Laboratories.”

— 742.12(3) — 4 cases

State Dept. of Revenue v. Aguirre, 705 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). “See § 742.12, Fla. Stat. (1989). Blood was drawn and submitted to Roche Biomedical Laboratories.”

Monts v. Washington, 764 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).

— 742.12(4) — 12 cases

Universal Ins. Co. of North Am. v. Warfel, 82 So. 3d 47 (Fla. 2012). “3d DCA 1990) (citing § 742.12, Fla. Stat. (1989)); Jones v. Crawford, 552 So.”

State Dept. of Revenue v. Aguirre, 705 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). “See § 742.12, Fla. Stat. (1989). Blood was drawn and submitted to Roche Biomedical Laboratories.”

Dep't of Revenue v. Smatt, 679 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).

Glover v. Miller, 947 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007).

— 742.12(5) — 1 case

Southwick v. State, Dep't of Revenue ex rel. Mulloy, 750 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

— 742.12(6) — 2 cases

Benardo v. Dep't of Revenue ex rel. Reilly, 819 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).

Benardo v. Dor Ex Rel. Reilly, 819 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.