Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Charles L. LONG, Appellant, v. Cynthia G. LONG and Leonard C. Davis, Appellees.
This case began as a dissolution of marriage action which appellee Cynthia Long filed against appellant Charles Long. Cynthia then filed a paternity action against appellee Leonard Davis pertaining to a child born during the Longs' marriage. Charles was permitted to intervene in the paternity action, and the two actions were consolidated. What could have been protracted litigation resolved itself into an uncontested dissolution of marriage with a marital settlement agreement and a dismissal of the paternity action. No evidence was offered as to the child's paternity, and the marital settlement agreement states that one child was born of the marriage.
Notwithstanding, the trial court included in its final judgment of dissolution a finding that Charles Long “is the legal father of the parties' minor child.” Charles appeals this finding and contends nothing in the record supports a finding that he is not the natural father of the child. We agree that the record is devoid of any evidence of paternity; therefore, we are unable to direct the trial court to make a specific finding that Charles is the natural father. Under these circumstances, the child is entitled to the benefit of the presumption of legitimacy ingrained in our law. See Eldridge v. Eldridge, 153 Fla. 873, 16 So.2d 163 (1944). Thus, we direct the trial court to amend the final judgment by striking the term “legal.” The judgment will thereafter read “․ Charles L. Long is the father of the parties' minor child․”
Reversed in part and remanded.
PATTERSON, Acting Chief Judge.
WHATLEY and GREEN, JJ., concur.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: No. 97-01663.
Decided: August 19, 1998
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida,Second District.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)