O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 19-7-49 (2019)

Final order; effect; evidence of costs

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)

Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) On a finding that the alleged father is the father of the child, the court shall issue an order designating the alleged father as the father of the child. The sole effect of the order shall be to establish the duty of the father to support the child. (b) On a finding that the alleged father is not the father of the child, the court shall issue an order declaring this finding.

(c) The trier of fact shall receive without foundation or the need for third-party testimony evidence of costs of pregnancy, child birth, and genetic testing. The evidence so presented shall constitute prima-facie evidence of amounts incurred for such services or for testing on behalf of the child. The court may award such costs as part of its final decree.

History

Code 1933, § 74-310, enacted by Ga. L. 1980, p. 1374, § 1; Ga. L. 1997, p. 1613, § 22.

Annotations

Cross references. Issuance or registration of new birth certificate upon order declaring paternity of child, §§ 31-10-12, 31-10-14.

Law reviews. For note on the role of a judicial determination of paternity in the inheritance rights of illegitimate children in Georgia, see 16 Ga. L. Rev. 171 (1981). For article commenting on the 1997 amendment of this Code section, see 14 Ga. St. U.L. Rev. 121 (1997).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS Credibility of expert is question for jury. - O.C.G.A. § 19-7-49 plainly requires the jury to determine whether the expert presenting the test results is credible. Until the jury makes the decision that the tests were properly conducted and that the expert presenting the results testified truthfully, the test results are not entitled to any greater deference than any other evidence of paternity. Howard v. Howard, 258 Ga. 846, 375 S.E.2d 852, 1989 Ga. LEXIS 61 (1989). Test results not binding on jury. - In divorce action, the issue of parentage is to be decided by the jury, and the fact that a human leukocyte antigen typing test concluded that the alleged father could not be the biological father of the child was not conclusive on the question of parentage; thus, the jury decision finding paternity could not be overturned on appeal. Jackson v. Jackson, 253 Ga. 576, 322 S.E.2d 725, 1984 Ga. LEXIS 1037 (1984). When the jury was instructed in accordance with O.C.G.A. § 19-7-49(c), and there was at least some basis upon which the jurors could have discounted the re-

sults of the prior testing as being unreliable, the jurors were authorized to reject those test results and to rely instead on the other evidence tending to show that the defendant was the child’s father. Williamson v. Ward, 192 Ga. App. 857, 386 S.E.2d 727, 1989 Ga. App. LEXIS 1249 (1989). Paternity disproven pursuant to subsection (b). - Ending a previously established duty to support or ordering a retroactive rescission of previously awarded child support may be in the best interest of the putative father who has proven his nonpaternity, but it is hardly in the best interest of the child. Thus, the issue of child support obligations that is conferred upon the trial court by O.C.G.A. § 19-7-51 would seemingly extend only to the case wherein paternity has been initially established pursuant to subsection (a) of O.C.G.A. § 19-7-49 not to the case wherein paternity has been disproven pursuant to subsection (b) of § 19-7-49. Department of Human Resources v. Morton, 204 Ga. App. 638, 420 S.E.2d 89, 1992 Ga. App. LEXIS 946 (1992).

RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. 41 Am. Jur. 2d, Illegitimate Children, § 81. C.J.S. 14 C.J.S., Children Out-of-Wedlock, § 116 et seq.

ALR. Judgment in bastardy proceeding as conclusive of issues in subsequent bastardy proceeding, 37 A.L.R.2d 836.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases, 1984–2002 · leading case: Rodriguez v. Nunez, 555 S.E.2d 514 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Rodriguez v. Nunez, 555 S.E.2d 514 (Ga. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 4× “” Nunez prayed for a declaration pursuant to OCGA § 19-7-49 (a) that Rivas was Hilda’s father and an order “requiring genetic testing of the decedent and Plaintiff pursuant to OCGA §§ 19-7-43, 19-7-45, and 19-7-46.”

Miller v. Charles, 439 S.E.2d 88 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 3× “DHR’s sole interest in the action was to recover the sums it had expended in behalf of the child, and we look no further than OCGA § 19-7-49 (a) to determine the gist of its cause of action against Glaze: “The sole effect of the order [in the prior action designating Glaze as…”

Dep't of Human Resources v. Morton, 420 S.E.2d 89 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 10× “Appellee’s duty to support was in no way dependent upon any affirmative finding under OCGA § 19-7-49 (a) that he was the father of the child.”

Families First v. Gooden, 439 S.E.2d 34 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Because the blood tests here indicate that Marve cannot be the father of the child, at the trial of this issue, the trial court must instruct the jury, as required by OCGA § 19-7-49 (c), “that, if they believe that the witness presenting the [blood test] results testified…”

Palmer v. Bertrand, 541 S.E.2d 360 (Ga. 2001). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 19-7-49 (a). Because the determination of paternity is only incidental to this purpose, there is no merit to Palmer’s claim that the paternity statutes discriminate on their face because fathers cannot sue to establish parental rights under the terms of the act.”

Williamson v. Ward, 386 S.E.2d 727 (Ga. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 19-7-49 (C) specifies that “[w]here the issue of parentage is to be decided by a jury, where the results of blood tests and comparisons are not shown to be inconsistent with the results of any other blood tests and comparisons, and where the results of those blood tests…”

Jackson v. Jackson, 322 S.E.2d 725 (Ga. 1984). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 19-7-49 (c) provides: “Where the issue of parentage is to be decided by a jury, where the results of blood tests and comparisons are not shown to be inconsistent with the results of any other blood tests and comparisons, and where the results of those blood tests and…”

Hill v. Adams, 357 S.E.2d 300 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “And unlike a legitimation proceeding, the child will have a guardian ad litem, by statutory command.”

Howard v. Howard, 375 S.E.2d 852 (Ga. 1989). · cites it 4× “Howard contends that under OCGA § 19-7-49 (c) a jury would be required to decide that he is not Jonathan’s natural father because the HLA tests results exclude him as the father and because there is no evidence that the tests were improperly conducted.”

Banks v. Hopson, 571 S.E.2d 730 (Ga. 2002). · cites it 2× “Laws 1374 , 1377 (now codified at OCGA § 19-7-49); see also Worthington, 250 Ga.”

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.