NJSBA Family Law Section

Hello Listmates,

New client brought in paperwork that he received from Texas via the Interstate Central Registry requesting that he be required to take a paternity test in Ocean County because it has been alleged by the biological mother (Texas Resident) that the child she recently had is my client's.  While my client admits he had a sexual encounter with the Plaintiff, her Certification is quite pithy.    

Based on the fact that he admits to the one time encounter, is he "required" to submit to the test or is there a defense to the request especially since there exists a jurisdictional issue as he has never resided in Texas.   

Never had a Central Registry Motion and want to be sure his rights are protected.  

Thank you in advance and have a Happy Thanksgiving.  

Best,

Eric Hannum  

-------------------------------------------
Eric Hannum Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)370-9596
-------------------------------------------

Eric:  It appears from your sceanrio that Texas made a request of your client to participate in genetic testing, which was then communicated to your client through the NJ Central Registry.  Sounds suspect.  My experience is that Texas does its own thing.  So, the first thing to determine is whether Texas obtained an order against your client.  If it did, there should have been a complaint filed against him in Texas.  If there is an issue of Texas having personal jurisdiction, your client may have to go to Texas to challenge it.  If the testing was ordered by a NJ court, then it was likely done as the result of a UIFSA petition heard in your client's county of residence.  In that instance, the testing would generally be coordinated through the county welfare agency or the county Family Division and not through the Central Registry.  Call me if you wish to discuss this further. 
-------------------------------------------
Mitch Steinhart, Esq.
Bergen County Board of Social Services
Rochelle Park, NJ
201-368-4207
-------------------------------------------


Original Message:
Sent: 11-25-2014 11:59
From: Eric Hannum
Subject: Paternity Test viaq Central Registery

Hello Listmates,

New client brought in paperwork that he received from Texas via the Interstate Central Registry requesting that he be required to take a paternity test in Ocean County because it has been alleged by the biological mother (Texas Resident) that the child she recently had is my client's.  While my client admits he had a sexual encounter with the Plaintiff, her Certification is quite pithy.    

Based on the fact that he admits to the one time encounter, is he "required" to submit to the test or is there a defense to the request especially since there exists a jurisdictional issue as he has never resided in Texas.   

Never had a Central Registry Motion and want to be sure his rights are protected.  

Thank you in advance and have a Happy Thanksgiving.  

Best,

Eric Hannum  

-------------------------------------------
Eric Hannum Esq.
Jackson NJ
(732)370-9596
-------------------------------------------

Eric -

You (or your client) aren't clear on the controlling fact issue here on jurisdiction.  It's that "first day of law school" jurisdiction issue (Pennoyer v. Neff / International Shoe).  If the issue is whether he has minimum contacts with Texas (and he never lived there / doesn't own property there, etc), then his getting her pregnant in TX would give TX jurisdiction.  If the parties had sex in New Jersey and she returned to Texas, then Texas wouldn't have jurisdiction (assuming their version of the parentage act is similar to ours) on that basis. You don't say where the sex occurred that may have resulted in the pregnancy.

As was said, he will need to raise this issue in TX.  It's also a "special appearance" to challenge jurisdiction, not an answer to the complaint, or he may inadvertently waive the jurisdictional defense.

But I'd research further... if he wins and has it dismissed in Texas and then she files here and gets a DNA test that proves paternity, NJ would be the first state to issue a support order and under UIFSA, and thus NJ law would control on issues like emancipation. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16550782748943351147&  Texas, I think, emancipates at "18 and out of High School" whereas ... well, I know you know NJ law on it.  He could "win the battle and lose the war" by getting it dismissed in TX and having her refile in New Jersey.  Think it through, maybe consult with TX counsel.

-------------------------------------------
David Perry Davis, Esq.
112 West Franklin Avenue
Pennington, NJ 08534
Voice: 609-737-2222
Fax: 609-737-3222
------------------------------------------- 

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14672018505919863381

The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), N.J.S.A. 2A:4-30.65 to -30.123, includes a similar long-arm jurisdiction provision:
In a proceeding to establish . . . a support order or to determine parentage, a tribunal of this State may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident individual . . . if: . . . . the individual engaged in sexual intercourse in this State and the child may have been conceived by that act of intercourse . . . .
[N.J.S.A. 2A:4-30.68(f).]

Dave,
 
When I said he never resided in Texas, I should have elaborated and
stated that he has never even stepped foot in Texas either.  Client was
stationed in FL when the sexual encounter took place and then he moved
back to New Jersey and she moved home to Texas and that is why I had the
issue with jurisdiction. 
 
Going to have to do some additional research and I truly appreciate your
insights.
 
Happy Turkey Day,
E 
 

 
 
 
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 02:43 PM, David Perry Davis via New Jersey State
Bar Association wrote:
 
 







New Jersey State Bar Association
<http: community.njsba.com/familylawsection="">



Family Law

<http: community.njsba.com/viewdiscussions/digestviewer/?groupid="1291">


Post New Message Online
<http: community.njsba.com/communities/postamessage/?groupid="1291">
 
Post New Message via Email
<mailto:[email protected]>


Re: Paternity Test viaq Central Registery
<http: community.njsba.com/communities/alldiscussions/viewthread/?groupid="1291&MID=17757&tab=digestViewer">


Reply All Online
<http: community.njsba.com/communities/alldiscussions/postreply/?mid="17757&GroupId=1291">

Reply All Email
<mailto:njsba_familylawne_72abd8c6-f759-46d6-aeb2-3348ad2d427c@connectedcommunity.org?subject=re:></mailto:njsba_familylawne_72abd8c6-f759-46d6-aeb2-3348ad2d427c@connectedcommunity.org?subject=re:>
Paternity Test viaq Central Registery>




David Perry Davis

<http: community.njsba.com/myprofile/profile/?userkey="679a86af-d472-43af-a81d-922d6adc4700">

Nov 25, 2014 2:43 PM
David Perry Davis
<http: community.njsba.com/myprofile/profile/?userkey="679a86af-d472-43af-a81d-922d6adc4700">




Eric -
You (or your client) aren't clear on the controlling fact issue here
on jurisdiction.  It's that "first day of law school" jurisdiction issue
(Pennoyer v. Neff / International Shoe).  If the issue is whether he has
minimum contacts with Texas (and he never lived there / doesn't own
property there, etc), then his getting her pregnant in TX would give TX
jurisdiction.  If the parties had sex in New Jersey and she returned to
Texas, then Texas wouldn't have jurisdiction (assuming their version of
the parentage act is similar to ours) on that basis. You don't say where
the sex occurred that may have resulted in the pregnancy.
As was said, he will need to raise this issue in TX.  It's also a
"special appearance" to challenge jurisdiction, not an answer to the
complaint, or he may inadvertently waive the jurisdictional defense.
But I'd research further... if he wins and has it dismissed in Texas
and then she files
here and gets a DNA test that proves paternity, NJ would be the first
state to issue a support order and under UIFSA, and thus NJ law would
control on issues like emancipation.
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16550782748943351147& 
Texas, I think, emancipates at "18 and out of High School" whereas ...
well, I know you know NJ law on it.  He could "win the battle and lose
the war" by getting it dismissed in TX and having her refile in New
Jersey.  Think it through, maybe consult with TX counsel.
-------------------------------------------
David Perry Davis, Esq.
112 West Franklin Avenue
Pennington, NJ 08534
Voice: 609-737-2222
Fax: 609-737-3222
------------------------------------------- 
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14672018505919863381
The Uniform
Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), N.J.S.A. 2A:4-30.65 to -30.123,
includes a similar long-arm jurisdiction provision:
In a proceeding to establish . . . a support order or to determine
parentage, a tribunal of this State may exercise personal jurisdiction
over a nonresident individual . . . if: . . . . the individual engaged
in sexual intercourse in this State and the child may have been
conceived by that act of intercourse . . . .
[N.J.S.A. 2A:4-30.68(f).]



 
View Thread
<http: community.njsba.com/communities/alldiscussions/viewthread/?groupid="1291&MID=17757&tab=digestviewer">
 
Recommend
<http: community.njsba.com/communities/alldiscussions/viewthread/?groupid="1291&MID=17757&MessageKey=72abd8c6-f759-46d6-aeb2-3348ad2d427c&cmd=rate&cmdarg=add">
 
Forward
<http: community.njsba.com/communities/alldiscussions/forwardmessages/?groupid="1291&MID=17757">
 




 

You are subscribed to "Family Law" as [email protected]. To change
your subscriptions, go to My Subscriptions
<http: community.njsba.com/mysubscriptions?a1="1"> . To unsubscribe from
this community discussion, go to Unsubscribe
<http: community.njsba.com/higherlogic/egroups/unsubscribe.aspx?userkey="5788a136-d189-4580-9c33-9ca0133fd77b&sKey=KeyRemoved&GroupKey=361ff785-76d5-4b5c-a682-ed144f0ee28c">
.


Original Message------

Eric -

You (or your client) aren't clear on the controlling fact issue here on jurisdiction.  It's that "first day of law school" jurisdiction issue (Pennoyer v. Neff / International Shoe).  If the issue is whether he has minimum contacts with Texas (and he never lived there / doesn't own property there, etc), then his getting her pregnant in TX would give TX jurisdiction.  If the parties had sex in New Jersey and she returned to Texas, then Texas wouldn't have jurisdiction (assuming their version of the parentage act is similar to ours) on that basis. You don't say where the sex occurred that may have resulted in the pregnancy.

As was said, he will need to raise this issue in TX.  It's also a "special appearance" to challenge jurisdiction, not an answer to the complaint, or he may inadvertently waive the jurisdictional defense.

But I'd research further... if he wins and has it dismissed in Texas and then she files here and gets a DNA test that proves paternity, NJ would be the first state to issue a support order and under UIFSA, and thus NJ law would control on issues like emancipation. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16550782748943351147&  Texas, I think, emancipates at "18 and out of High School" whereas ... well, I know you know NJ law on it.  He could "win the battle and lose the war" by getting it dismissed in TX and having her refile in New Jersey.  Think it through, maybe consult with TX counsel.

-------------------------------------------
David Perry Davis, Esq.
112 West Franklin Avenue
Pennington, NJ 08534
Voice: 609-737-2222
Fax: 609-737-3222
------------------------------------------- 

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14672018505919863381

The Uniform Interstate Family Support Act (UIFSA), N.J.S.A. 2A:4-30.65 to -30.123, includes a similar long-arm jurisdiction provision:
In a proceeding to establish . . . a support order or to determine parentage, a tribunal of this State may exercise personal jurisdiction over a nonresident individual . . . if: . . . . the individual engaged in sexual intercourse in this State and the child may have been conceived by that act of intercourse . . . .
[N.J.S.A. 2A:4-30.68(f).]

</http:></http:></http:></http:></http:></http:></http:></http:></http:></mailto:[email protected]></http:></http:></http:>