Notes of Decisions
Cited in
20
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1959–2026 · leading case:
Hulett v. Hulett, 544 N.E.2d 257 (Ohio 1989).
Hulett v. Hulett, 544 N.E.2d 257 (Ohio 1989).
· cites it 6× “) Included therein was the following version of R.C. 3111.10, which provided: “In an action brought under this chapter, evidence relating to paternity may include: “(A) Evidence of sexual intercourse between the mother and alleged father at any possible time of conception; “(B)…”
Domigan v. Gillette, 479 N.E.2d 291 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “R.C. 3111.10 provides that evidence relating to paternity may include: “(A) Evidence of sexual intercourse between the mother and alleged father at any possible time of conception; * * “(E) All other evidence relevant to the issue of paternity of the child.”
Camden v. Miller, 517 N.E.2d 253 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 3× “Effective in mid-1982, the legislature enacted R.C. 3111.10, which permitted the admission of certain test results indicating the probability of paternity.”
In Re Mccall, 383 B.R. 419 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio 2007).
· cites it 8× “66(A)(6)(b) references O.R.C. § 3111.10 which arguably would not apply to Mr.”
Owens v. Bell, 451 N.E.2d 241 (Ohio 1983).
“” R.C. 3111.10 (evidence of paternity): “In an action brought under this chapter, evidence relating to paternity may include: * * * “(C) Genetic test results, weighted in accordance with evidence, if available, of the statistical probability of the alleged father’s paternity; *…”
Beck v. Jolliff, 489 N.E.2d 825 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984).
“) R.C. 3111.10 (1982): “In an action brought under this chapter, evidence relating to paternity may include: * * “(E) All other evidence relevant to the issue of paternity of the child.”
Brill v. Hedges, 783 F. Supp. 340 (S.D. Ohio 1991).
· cites it 2× “Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.10. Thus, it is apparent that no legal presumption arises through the mother’s choice of a surname for her child, and even if such a presumption were to arise, the existence of Ohio’s paternity action allows for the quick resolution of any dispute.”
In re J.D., 2017 Ohio 1081 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 3× “As this court observed in a parentage action: “As per R.C. 3111.10(A), the existence of sexual relations between the parties at any possible time of conception is admissible evidence relating to paternity.”
McMullen v. Muir, 517 N.E.2d 1381 (Ohio Ct. App. 1986).
“See R.C. 3111.10; Evid. R. 602. In light of the substantial evidence to support the trial court’s decision, not the least of which is Elizabeth’s testimony that Muir admitted that he was her father, we find that the improperly admitted hearsay testimony was harmless.”
Weber v. Weber, 599 N.E.2d 288 (Ohio Ct. App. 1991).
“03(A)(1) may be adduced through any or all of the enumerated methods prescribed by R.C. 3111.10, including the submission of genetic test results.”
In re Collins, 2012 Ohio 5234 (Ohio Ct. App. 2012).
““The parent and child relationship extends equally to all children and all parents, regardless of the marital status of the parents.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.10(A) — 1 case
In re J.D., 2017 Ohio 1081 (Ohio Ct. App. 2017).
“As this court observed in a parentage action: “As per R.C. 3111.10(A), the existence of sexual relations between the parties at any possible time of conception is admissible evidence relating to paternity.”
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.10(C) — 3 cases
— Ohio Rev. Code § 3111.10(E) — 1 case
Domigan v. Gillette, 479 N.E.2d 291 (Ohio Ct. App. 1984).
“R.C. 3111.10 provides that evidence relating to paternity may include: “(A) Evidence of sexual intercourse between the mother and alleged father at any possible time of conception; * * “(E) All other evidence relevant to the issue of paternity of the child.”
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.