408 Pa. Super. 269 - Gulla v. Fitzpatrick’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
45 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably Freedman v. McCandless (1995), In Re Adoption of S.A.J. (2003)
45 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on John M. v. Paula T. · 377 Pa. Super. 391 - Seger v. Seger · 295 Pa. Super. 169 - Hattoum v. Hattoum · 379 Pa. Super. 618 - Wachter v. Ascero · In Re Adoption of Young
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We see the Commonwealth/family interests highlighted by the “estoppel” cases. In these cases, it is recognized that, under certain circumstances, a person might be es-topped from challenging paternity where that person has by his or her conduct accepted a given person as father of the child. The classic example of this principle is where a man who has lived with a woman and her children for a number of years and has held himself to the world as the father of said children, may be estopped from seeking court-ordered blood tests in a belated attempt to deny paternity.... These estoppel cases indicate that where the principle is operative, blood tests may be irrelevant, for the law will not permit a person in these situations to challenge the status which he or she has previously accepted.... The General Assembly has codified the principle of “paternity by estoppel” is its Act of June 17, 1971, ... which provides: Children; legitimacy; determination of paternity (b) For purposes of prescribing benefits to children born out of wedlock by, from and through the father, paternity shall be determined by any one of the following ways: (2) If during the lifetime of the child, the father openly holds out the child to be his and receives the child into his home, or openly holds the child out to be his and provides support for the child which shall be determined by clear and convincing evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[UJnder certain circumstances, a person might be estopped from challenging paternity where that person has by his or her conduct accepted a given person as the father of the child____ In this case, however, we agree with the trial court and are convinced that the facts indicate that the presumptive father and mother repudiated their marriage vows long ago. Additionally, we have evidence that the presumptive father did not accept the child as his own. The circumstances before us, as found by the trial court, are that the presumptive father has never financially or emotionally supported Katie____ Thus, we agree with the Superior Court that there being no intact family considerations present, a determination regarding Trojak’s [the putative father] paternity is necessary to resolve the child support claim made by Jones.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The advisability of applying equitable estoppel ... will often be bolstered by the fact that to do so will serve the best interests of the child, who has developed a parent-child relationship with the man who has assumed the responsibilities of fatherhood. As an en banc panel of the court noted in Commonwealth ex rel. Coburn v. Coburn, 384 Pa.Super. 295 , 558 A.2d 548 (1989): ... the best interests of the child sometimes require that a non-biological parent or stepparent, who has nurtured the child and developed a loving relationship, must be given custody and/or visitation rights even though his relationship with the natural mother may have ended.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.