Opinion ID: 2342308
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Applicable Statutes and the Form

Text: Acknowledging Paternity and 9-10-120. At the time of M.N.'s birth in 1990, the applicable paternity statute, Ark.Code Ann. § 9-10-115, provided: The court may, at any time, enlarge, diminish, or vacate any such order or judgment in the proceedings under this section and §§ 9-10-1019-10-103, 9-10-105, 9-10-110, 9-10-111, and 9-10-1179-10-119 as justice may require and on such notice to the defendant as the court may prescribe. Act 1091 of 1995 modified this statute substantially. This revised version, which was in effect when Hale filed this paternity action against Bean in 1996, stated: [1] 9-10-115. Modification of orders or judgments. (a) The chancery court may, at any time, enlarge, diminish, or vacate any such order or judgment in the proceedings under this section, except in regard to the issue of paternity, as justice may require and on such notice to the defendant as the court may prescribe. (b) The court shall not set aside, alter, or modify any final decree, order, or judgment of paternity where paternity blood testing, genetic testing, or other scientific evidence was used to determine the adjudicated father as the biological father. (c)(1) Upon request for modification of a judicial finding of paternity or a support order issued pursuant to § 9-10-120, if the court determines that the original finding of paternity or support order did not include results of scientific paternity testing, consent of the parents, or was not entered upon a party's failure to comply with scientific paternity testing ordered by the court, the court shall, upon request when paternity is disputed, direct the biological mother, the child, and the adjudicated or presumed father to submit to scientific testing for paternity, which may include deoxyribonucleic acid testing or other tests as provided by § 9-10-108. (2) In no event shall the adjudication or acknowledgment of paternity be modified later than five (5) years after such adjudication or execution of such acknowledgment. (d) If the court determines, based upon the results of scientific testing, that the adjudicated or presumed father is not the biological father, the court shall, upon request of an adjudicated or presumed father, set aside a previous finding of paternity and relieve the adjudicated or presumed father of any future obligation of support or any back child support as authorized under § 9-14-234 as of the date of entry of the order of modification. (e) If the court determines, based upon the results of scientific testing, that the presumed father is the biological father, the court shall enter an order adjudicating paternity and setting child support in accordance with § 9-10-109, the guidelines for child support, and the family support chart. In addition, Act 1091 of 1995 created Ark. Code Ann. § 9-10-120, which stated: [2] 9-10-120. Effect of acknowledgment of paternity. (a) A man is presumed to be the father of a child for all intents and purposes if he and the mother execute an acknowledgment of paternity of the child pursuant to § 20-18-408 or § 20-18-409, or a similar acknowledgment executed during the child's minority. (b)(1) Acknowledgments of paternity shall by operation of law constitute a conclusive finding of paternity, subject to the modification of orders or judgments under § 9-10-115, and shall be recognized by the chancery courts and juvenile divisions thereof as creating a parent and child relationship between father and child. (2) Such acknowledgments of paternity shall also be recognized as forming the basis for establishment and enforcement of a child support order without a further proceeding to establish paternity. (c) Upon submission of the acknowledgment of paternity to the Division of Vital Records of the Department of Health, the State Registrar of Vital Records shall accordingly establish a new certificate of birth reflecting the name of the father as recited in the acknowledgment of paternity. Based on the 1995 revised statutes, Bean argues that Nichols's execution of the Affidavit of Birth Out of Wedlock constitutes an acknowledgment of paternity sufficient to qualify by operation of law as a conclusive finding of paternity under Ark.Code Ann. § 9-10-120(a) and (b)(1) and, because more than five years had passed since Stanley signed the affidavit, this conclusion could not be modified by the chancery court pursuant to Ark.Code Ann. § 9-10-115(c)(2). CSEU, on the other hand, argues that not only was this affidavit not the type of form contemplated by the Act but also that Act 1091 of 1995 cannot be retroactively applied to this affidavit which was signed in 1990 to bring it under the statute and make it binding on Nichols. We first consider whether the Affidavit of Birth Out of Wedlock is the type of acknowledgment of paternity contemplated by the statutes. Ark.Code Ann. § 9-10-120(a) notes that the court may consider an acknowledgment of paternity of the child pursuant to § 20-18-408 or § 20-18-409, or a similar acknowledgment executed during the child's minority when it makes a determination of paternity. Ark.Code Ann. §§ 20-18-408 and 20-18-409, created by Act 928 of 1993 and partially amended in 1995, established an actual form to be used as an affidavit of paternity so that parents could establish paternity. As noted at the paternity hearing, CSEU Investigator Phyllis Beaty offered a sample of a form used for such a purpose, and the form was titled Affidavit Acknowledging Paternity. Clearly, these statutes were not in effect in 1990 when Nichols signed the Affidavit of Birth Out of Wedlock to allow that acknowledgment to comply with Ark.Code Ann. § 20-18-408 or § 20-18-409. However, Ark.Code Ann. § 9-10-120(a) also allows a similar acknowledgment to suffice if it is executed during the child's minority. The pertinent language of that affidavit states: The following affidavit must be signed in the presence of a notary public by both parents of a child born out of wedlock if there is mutual consent for the child to carry the surname of the father or the legal surname of the mother, and for the birth certificate to show information on the father. The form goes on to state: We, the natural parents of M.N. Ross Nichols born in Russellville, Pope County, Arkansas, on 06-26-90, wish to have our child carry the surname as indicated in the box checked below and for the birth certificate to show all requested information on the father. We understand that by signing this affidavit, the natural father is acknowledging possible financial and legal responsibilities to the child named herein. Both Nichols's and Hale's notarized signatures appear on the form. The form notes that M.N. is to carry the surname of Nichols, and that is the surname that appears on M.N.'s birth certificate. In reading the Affidavit of Birth Out of Wedlock signed by Nichols, we hold that it would comply with the intent of § 9-10-120(a) as a similar acknowledgment.