Johnson v. Johnson

Decided April 4, 1996

Supreme Court of North Carolina · decided 1996-04-04

<bold>Evidence and Witnesses § 1920 (NCI4th); Illegitimate</bold> <bold>Children § 7 (NCI4th) — blood grouping test — alleged natural</bold> <bold>father — standing to compel</bold> <block_quote> The language of N.C.G.S. § <cross_reference>8-50.1</cross_reference> in effect when this action originated does not confer standing upon an alleged natural father to compel a presumed father to submit to a blood test to determine the paternity of a child born during the marriage of the presumed father and the mother.</block_quote> <bold>Am Jur 2d, Illegitimate Children § 27</bold>. <block_quote> <bold>Admissibility and weight of blood-grouping tests in disputed</bold> <bold>paternity cases. 43 ALR4th 579</bold>.</block_quote> <block_quote> <bold>Parental rights of man who is not biological or adoptive</bold> <bold>father of child but was husband or cohabitant of mother</bold> <bold>when child was conceived or born. 84 ALR4th 655</bold>.</block_quote>

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently February 2002

7 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“Does the language of N.C.[G.S.] § 8-50.1 in effect when this action originated confer standing upon an alleged natural parent such as Mr. Meehan [the boyfriend] to compel a presumed father such as Mr. Johnson [the husband] to submit to a blood test to determine the paternity of a child born during the marriage of the presumed father to the natural mother?”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 148 N.C. App. 364 - Jeffries v. Moore

“the question should be answered in the negative.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 148 N.C. App. 364 - Jeffries v. Moore

Relies on 120 N.C. App. 1 - Johnson v. Johnson

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1996-04-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Judge Walker’s dissenting opinion in the Court of Appeals correctly poses the “narrow” issue presented:

Does the language of N.C.[G.S.] § 8-50.1 in effect when this action originated confer standing upon an alleged natural parent such as *115 Mr. Meehan to compel a presumed father such as Mr. Johnson to submit to a blood test to determine the paternity of a child born during the marriage of the presumed father to the natural mother?

¶2 Johnson v. Johnson, 120 N.C. App. 1, 14, 461 S.E.2d 369, 376 (1995) (Walker, J., dissenting). We agree with the dissenting opinion that the question should be answered in the negative.

¶3 Accordingly, the decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded to that court for remand to the District Court, Johnston County, for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

¶4 REVERSED AND REMANDED.