Go Back   LegalMatch Free Legal Advice Forums > Family Law Forum > Family Law Issues
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Find a Lawyer Now By Category:
Family & Divorce Criminal Defense Job & Employment Personal Injury LegalMatch on Facebook
  Real Estate Lawyers Immigration Business Lawyers Other Lawyers LegalMatch on Twitter
LegalMatch is Fast, Free and Confidential
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-29-2013, 09:57 AM   #1 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1
Myself, biogical father, being omitted on children's birth certificates

My ex wife and I divorced in 2006, at which time she was pregnant with our son. The divorce was signed by the judge on April 24 2006 and our son was born April 26 2006. Now in the divorce decree it states; " this decree becomes final and operative, except for the purposes of review by appeal, remarriage, and continuation of health coverage, thirty (30) days after the decree is rendered or on the date of death of one of the parties to the dissolution, which ever occurs first."
Now I learned with in the last 2 years that my name had been left off of the birth certificate as the biological father and he was given my ex wife's maiden surname. There has never been a question of paternity and I paid due child support that was ordered up until a year ago, but there had never been any custody filed with the courts. A little over a year ago I filed for custody of my son as well as our 4 year old daughter. I was granted temporary custody and she was granted visitation and ordered to pay me child support. 3 months ago we had our permanent custody hearing. After repeatedly trying to assassinate my character, which not only failed but backfired horribly on her, the judge granted me permanent custody with her having visitation and paying me child support.
My question is, with the wording of the divorce decree and the fact that my son was born only 2 days after it was signed. Were we not still legally married since it had only been 2 days and not 30 as stated in the divorce decree? Should I have been listed as the biological father on his birth certificate? Should he have been given my surname since the decree was not yet final and she would still legally have had my surname?
knudsenjj is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2014, 09:25 PM   #2 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 85
Based on the wording of the divorce decree it may be likely that the marriage dissolution had not been finalized, that your name should have been on the birth certificate and that your surname should belong to the baby's. However, to determine the merits of this argument it is advisable to speak with a family law or divorce attorney who can advise you of your rights at this point, given the several junctures during which child custody agreements were modified. A link can be found here: http://www.legalmatch.com/divorce-lawyers.html
jonathan.vogel is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:58 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.1.0
Copyright ©1999-2008 LegalMatch. All rights reserved. LegalMatch®, the LegalMatch
logo, and the tradedress are trademarks of LegalMatch. Patents Pending.