439 Pa. Super. 385 - Kohler v. Bleem’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
46 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably 2007 Pa. Super. 402 - Vargo v. Schwartz (2007), K.E.M. v. P.C.S. (2012)
46 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 Granito v. United States · Michael v. Gerald D · 318 Pa. Super. 90 - Delahanty v. First Pennsylvania Bank, N.A. · John M. v. Paula T. · Phelps v. O'Donnell
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The presumption ... and the doctrine of paternity by estoppel grew out of a concern for the protection of the family unit; where that unit no longer exists, it defies both logic and fairness to apply equitable principles to perpetuate a pretense. In [Kohler ], application of estoppel would punish the party that sought to do what was righteous and reward that party that has perpetrated a fraud.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]f the matter involves a child born out of wedlock, no presumptions apply and the determination will turn on application of estoppel principles to the particular facts of the case. See In the Matter of Naja Green, 437 Pa.Super. 606 , 650 A.2d 1072 (1994); Jefferson [v. Perry, 432 Pa.Super. 651 , 639 A.2d 830 (1994)]; Everett [v. Anglemeyer, 425 Pa.Super. 587 , 625 A.2d 1252 (1993)]. See also 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 5102(b). Second, if the matter involves a child born during wedlock, the presumption automatically applies but may be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence of non-access or impotency/sterility. [Commonwealth ex rel. Goldman v.] Goldman, 199 Pa.Super. 274 , 184 A.2d 351 (1962) ... Additionally, application of estoppel principles may be employed to determine whether the presumption may be rebutted. If estoppel principles are applicable, the presumption will generally prevail.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“What the trial court neglected to consider, however, is the role of estoppel principles in a factual situation such as this, that is, one involving fraud and misrepresentation and the absence of an intact family. The confusion in this case arises from the fact that Mr. Kohler did accept Leslie as his daughter, knowing that she was not his child. This brings into play the paternity by estoppel doctrine. Mr. Kohler, however, was operating under the misrepresentation that an “unknown” man had fathered the child. But for this fact, Mr. Kohler indicated that he would have left his wife immediately. In fact, Mr. Kohler did so when he was told that Mr. Bleem [the Kohlers’ next-door neighbor] was Leslie’s natural father.”
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.