210.823. Acknowledgment of paternity is considered a legal finding of paternity — rescinding the acknowledgment. — 1. A signed acknowledgment of paternity form pursuant to section 193.215 shall be considered a legal finding of paternity subject to the right of either signatory to rescind the acknowledgment, in writing, by filing such rescission with the bureau within the earlier of:
(1) Sixty days from the date of the last signature; or
(2) The date of an administrative or judicial proceeding to establish a support order in which the signatory is a party. The acknowledgment may thereafter only be challenged in court on the basis of fraud, duress or material mistake of fact with the burden of proof upon the challenger. No judicial or administrative proceeding shall be required or permitted to ratify an unchallenged acknowledgment of paternity.
2. Except for good cause shown, the legal responsibilities of the parties, including child support obligations, shall not be suspended during the pendency of any action in which an attempt is made to revoke the signed acknowledgment under this section.
3. The acknowledgment shall be filed with the bureau. An acknowledgment effectuated under the law of any other state or territory shall be given the same effect in this state as it has in the other state or territory.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 2007–2025 · leading case:
Wilson v. Cramer, 317 S.W.3d 206 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).
Wilson v. Cramer, 317 S.W.3d 206 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 21× “Mother and Stowe argued that Wilson lacked standing because Stowe had signed an affidavit acknowledging that he was Son’s father (“Acknowledgment of Paternity”), see section 210.823, 1 and because the Director of the Division of Child Support Enforcement, Department of Social…”
A.A.B. v. A.D.L., 572 S.W.3d 562 (Mo. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 8× “Instead, in Section 210.823, the UP A specifically allows for a legal finding of paternity in favor of a man who may or may not be the biological father when he has executed an acknowledgment of paternity.”
In Re Adoption of Nlbmt v. Lentz, 212 S.W.3d 123 (Mo. 2007).
· cites it 4× “On March 2, less than a week after the hearing, father now well aware that adoption proceedings had commenced, filed with the putative father registry pursuant to section 210.823, and mother signed the documents as well confirming that Lentz was the father.”
S.A.S. ex rel. Z.J.S. v. B.P., 314 S.W.3d 348 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 12× “argues the trial court erred as a matter of law in interpreting Section 210.823 and Section 210.834 to require it to dismiss Z.”
Doss v. Brown, 419 S.W.3d 784 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 2× “child support payment order has been excluded as the child’s *788 father, the court shall, unless it makes written findings of fact and conclusions of law that it is in the best interest of the parties not to do so: (1) Grant relief on the petition and enter judgment setting…”
In the Interest of C.L. v. M.T., 335 S.W.3d 19 (Mo. Ct. App. 2011).
· cites it 2× “On March 2, less than a week after the hearing, father now well aware that adoption proceedings had commenced, filed with the putative father registry pursuant to section 210.823, and mother signed the documents as well confirming that [C.”
F.J.M., Individually & as Next Friend for A.E.J.J. v. F.L.J. (Mo. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 29× “section 210.823, the Notice and Finding of Financial Responsibility in said Pettis County case stating that [Father and Mother] acknowledged [Father's] paternity of the Child by affidavit (Petitioner's Exhibit OOOO), and ordering [Father] to pay [Mother] child support for the…”
C.M.G. v. B.M.C., Respondent/Respondent, O.R.C., Minor, & State of Missouri, Dept. of Soc. Servs., Fam. Support Div., Respondent/Respondent. (Mo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 23× “Knowing these facts at the time, Petitioner and Mother signed an affidavit acknowledging paternity of the child, pursuant to section 210.823 RSMo. (2016), naming Petitioner as the father.”
Adoption of N.L.B. v. C.L., 274 S.W.3d 619 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 2× “215 which, under section 210.823, ‘shall be considered a legal finding of paternity.”
Sas v. Bp, 314 S.W.3d 348 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 12× “argues the trial court erred as a matter of law in interpreting Section 210.823 and Section 210.834 to require it to dismiss Z.”
In Re Adoption of NLB, 274 S.W.3d 619 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 4× “On March 2, less than a week after the hearing, father now well aware that adoption proceedings had commenced, filed with the putative father registry pursuant to section 210.823, and mother signed the documents as well confirming that [C.”
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.