Opinion ID: 4557512
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: conclusion

Text: The district court did not err in finding that Sara failed to meet her burden to set aside the notarized acknowledgment of paternity executed by Tyler and Sara at the time of J.F.’s birth. Additionally, a previous paternity determination, including a properly executed and undisturbed acknowledgment of paternity, must be set aside before a third party’s paternity may be considered. As a result, the district court committed plain error considering Geoffrey’s paternity complaint while failing to give proper legal effect to Tyler’s acknowledgment of paternity. Accordingly, we affirm the court’s denial of Sara’s counterclaim to set aside Tyler’s acknowledgment of paternity; reverse the district court’s award of joint legal and physical custody of J.F. to Sara, Tyler, and Geoffrey; and remand the cause for further proceedings. Affirmed in part, and in part reversed and remanded for further proceedings.