Michigan and the 14th Amendment

[BelizeBreeze]

What is the name of your state? Michigan

Since JROSE36 doesn't seem to care about the consequences of her lying to child and biological father, I thought i'd pull up a few homemade bisquits, hunks of pepperjack cheese, a little creamery butter and a few slabs of roast and explain why Michigan WILL see a constitutional challenge to the Paternity Act (MCL 722.711 et seq.,) in the near future that will move to the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the present situation, a child was born to a marriage although the biological father was not the mother's husband. Based on the aforementioned Paternity Act, and contrary to most other states, standing to establish parentage is granted only to a mother, a father, or in certain circumstances, the Department of Human Services. MCL 722.714.

The Act further stipulates that the Father, for purposes of the act, is the signator of the AOP or, if born in wedlock, the mother's husband. And herein lies the problem.

The Paternity Act defines “[c]hild born out of wedlock” as
a child begotten and born to a woman who was not married from the conception to the date of birth of the child, or a child that the court has determined to be a child born or conceived during a marriage but not the issue of that marriage. [MCL 722.711(a).] However, the courts have consistently refused to interpret such language in light of the biological father's constitutional rights or the rights of the child to know and have known her/his father.

In fact, in a recent decision handed down by the Michigan supreme court in Barnes v Jeudevine, Docket No. 129606 the court all but allowed the mother to deny the father the opportunity to establish legal parentage by marrying another man before the live birth, thereby invoking the Paternity Act and shutting out the biological father from ever asserting his rights under law.

the facts are repeated in NUMERICK v. KRULL
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache...pdf+Numerick+v+Krull&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

The problem with the law as written is that once the biological father is precluded from exercising his constitutional rights, so is, by statute, the putative father. In WHITING v TAYLOR-BOLT and BOLT the court found that although the child in question belonged to Taylor-Bolt's previous boyfriend, because it was born of the marriage and the couple had signed an AOP, Bolt was the legal father and Whitting had no legal standing to contest.
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache...t.pdf+M.C.L.+722.714&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

And now for the kicker:

Michigan, in it's infinate wisdom, has also allowed a suit to go forward wherein the child of such a travesty is allowed to sue her mother to reveal her biological father. The case is only identified as the Minor J petition but has been docketed in Macomb County Circuit Court. http://www.ejfi.org/family/family-76.htm

so the entire sordid story unravels. And I haven't even talked yet about civil suits for fraud, falsification of a legal document or perjury...

 

[nextwife]

Thank you for that, Breezy.

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state? Michigan

so the entire sordid story unravels. And I haven't even talked yet about civil suits for fraud, falsification of a legal document or perjury...

That was really interesting....however I do have a question, and one that is without sarcasm or anything other than an honest question.

If bio-dad is not permitted to challenge paternity, therefore not able to establish biological paternity, how would it be possible for a civil suit for fraud, falsification of a legal document, or perjury to even take place?

 

[BelizeBreeze]

That was really interesting....however I do have a question, and one that is without sarcasm or anything other than an honest question.

If bio-dad is not permitted to challenge paternity, therefore not able to establish biological paternity, how would it be possible for a civil suit for fraud, falsification of a legal document, or perjury to even take place?

The last two can be brought on behalf of the state with a Writ of Mandamus initiated by the biological father. The first can be brought by the father himself or by writ to the court.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Further:

I am writing just such a writ for brother dearest to be filed in the Jackson County court in less than a week should the district attorney not address a similiar issue

 

[JROSE36]

First of all lets clairify that my child, bio father or husband are not lied to. When the time comes my child can know bio fathers name. Just like adoption but with more info.
Question: In the case where no AOP was signed and it is the law that says the husband is the father, then how would there be fraud, falsification of a legal document or perjury? Would'nt the state be liable?

 

[ceara19]

First of all lets clairify that my child, bio father or husband are not lied to. When the time comes my child can know bio fathers name. Just like adoption but with more info.
Question: In the case where no AOP was signed and it is the law that says the husband is the father, then how would there be fraud, falsification of a legal document or perjury? Would'nt the state be liable?

You knowingly allowed your husband's name to be put on the birth certificate when you knew full well that he was NOT the father. YOU could have taken action at the time to straighten this mess out, but YOU chose not to. Therefore YOU are the only one liable.

 

[JROSE36]

Ceara19, you don't know what your talking about . I did not have the choice of who to put as the father. Because ,if you are married ,the husband is the presumed father and goes on the birth certificate in the state of Michigan. You have no chioce that is the law.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Ceara19, you don't know what your talking about . I did not have the choice of who to put as the father. Because ,if you are married ,the husband is the presumed father and goes on the birth certificate in the state of Michigan. You have no chioce that is the law.

You want to bet?
In MICHIGAN the CHILD is presumed to be a product of the marriage. There is no legal obligation for the husband to signe the birth certificate or the AOP.

I suggest you leave the law to the attorneys here.

 

[seniorjudge]

The last two can be brought on behalf of the state with a Writ of Mandamus initiated by the biological father. The first can be brought by the father himself or by writ to the court.

Mandamus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

A writ of mandamus or simply mandamus, which means "we command" in Latin, is the name of one of the prerogative writs in the common law, and is issued by a superior court to compel a lower court or a government officer to perform mandatory or purely ministerial duties correctly.[1]

Mandamus is a judicial remedy which is in the form of an order from a superior court to any government, subordinate court, corporation or public authority to do or forbear from doing some specific act which that body is obliged under law to do or refrain from doing, as the case may be, and which is in the nature of public duty and in certain cases of a statutory duty.[2] It cannot be issued to compel an authority to do something against statutory provision.

Mandamus can be supplemented by the statement that it is not only the command to do but also a command not to do a particular thing against the rights of the petitioner. Mandamus is supplemented by legal rights. It must be judicially enforceable and legally protected right before one suffering a legal grievance can ask for a mandamus. A person can be said to be aggrieved only when he is denied a legal right by someone who has a legal duty to do something and abstains from doing it.

The applicant pleading for the writ of mandamus to be enforced should be able to show that he has a legal right to compel the respondent to do or refrain from doing the specific act. The duty sought to be enforced must have two qualities:[3]

1. It must be a duty of public nature
2. The duty must be imperative and should not be discretionary.

Normally, a writ of mandamus does not issue to, or an order in the nature of mandamus is not made, against the private individual. It is not necessary that the person or the authority on whom the statutory duty is imposed be a public official or an official body. A mandamus can issue, for instance, to an official of a society to compel him to carry out the terms of the statute under or by which the society is constituted or governed and also to companies or corporations to carry out duties placed on them by the statutes authorizing their undertakings. A mandamus would be equally applicable for a company constituted by a statute for the purposes of fulfilling public responsibilities. The court to which the application for the issue of mandamus is made will not constitute itself a court of appeal from the decision of the administrative authority and will not examine the correctness or otherwise of a decision on merits.[4] The exercise of administrative discretion is not interfered upon by the court, but it will do so if there has been an illegal exercise of the discretion. There is an illegal exercise of discretion where:

1. The order is made without, or in excess of jurisdiction
2. The order made is mala fide, or
3. The authority is influenced by extraneous consideration.

etc.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandamus

 

[LdiJ]

You want to bet?
In MICHIGAN the CHILD is presumed to be a product of the marriage. There is no legal obligation for the husband to signe the birth certificate or the AOP.

I suggest you leave the law to the attorneys here.

The social workers at the hospitals in Michigan really do make it appear as if mom and her husband have absolutely no choice in the matter.

 

[JROSE36]

My husband did'nt have to sign anything, AOP or birth cetificate.

 

[moburkes]

Ceara19, you don't know what your talking about . I did not have the choice of who to put as the father. Because ,if you are married ,the husband is the presumed father and goes on the birth certificate in the state of Michigan. You have no chioce that is the law.

My husband did'nt have to sign anything, AOP or birth cetificate.

However, the mother can obtain a court order stating that the husband is NOT the father of the child. Then the court can issue a judgment saying that the husband's name either not appear on the BC, or be removed from the BC.

 

[JROSE36]

However, the mother can obtain a court order stating that the husband is NOT the father of the child. Then the court can issue a judgment saying that the husband's name either not appear on the BC, or be removed from the BC.

​

Your right I probly could have, but im not a lawer and I did'nt happen to get that pamplet 6 years ago when I left the hospital. Never saw one at the vital records office either. Not tryin to be sarcastic or anything but its not common knowledge. My husband could have done the same thing, bio father could have stepped up to the plate then. After 6 years its to late.

 

[ceara19]

However, the mother can obtain a court order stating that the husband is NOT the father of the child. Then the court can issue a judgment saying that the husband's name either not appear on the BC, or be removed from the BC.

​

Your right I probly could have, but im not a lawer and I didn't happen to get that pamplet 6 years ago when I left the hospital. Never saw one at the vital records office either. Not tryin to be sarcastic or anything but its not common knowledge. My husband could have done the same thing, bio father could have stepped up to the plate then. After 6 years its to late.

It doesn't take a law degree to ask someone at the vital statistic's office, "what should I do if the father on the birth certificate is not the real father?". The idiotic excuse of not seeing a brochure isn't going to fly. If your car is stolen are you going to wait to report it until you happen to come across a pamphlet that tells you that you should call the police and report it?