Document: 452 U.S. 1 101 S.Ct. 2202 68 L.Ed.2d 627 Walter LITTLE, Appellant,v.Gloria STREATER. No. 79-6779. Argued Jan. 13, 1981. Decided June 1, Syllabus After appellee, while unmarried, gave birth to a female child, she identified appellant as the father Connecticut Department of Social Services, requirement stemming from child's receipt public assistance. The then provided an attorney for appellee bring paternity suit against in state court. Appellant moved trial court order blood grouping tests on and her child pursuant statute (§ 46b-168), which includes provision that cost such shall be chargeable party requesting them. Asserting he was indigent, asked State ordered pay tests. granted motion insofar it sought but denied request they furnished at State's expense, with result no were performed. trial, found father, entered damages judgment him, him support directly State. Appellate Session Superior Court affirmed, holding, inter alia, § 46b-168 does not violate due process rights indigent defendant proceeding. Held: In circumstances this case, application deny because his lack financial resources violated guarantee Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 5-17. (a) Appellant's claim is premised unique quality source exculpatory evidence, prominent role litigation, character suits under law. evaluating claim, following factors must considered: private interests stake; risk procedures used will lead erroneous results probable value, if any, additional or substitute procedural safeguards; governmental affected. Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 319, 335, 96 893, 47 18. 5-12. (b) Assessment these indicates did receive constitutionally due. implicated are substantial. Given usual absence witnesses suit, self-interest coloring litigants' testimony, Connecticut's onerous evidentiary rule reputed father's testimony alone insufficient overcome mother's prima facie refusal tests, inconsiderable erroneously adjudged father. Furthermore, its recognized capacity definitively exclude high percentage falsely accused putative fathers, availability scientific test evidence clearly would valuable safeguard cases. And interest avoiding expenses significant enough substantial involved, particularly where federal funds available help defray could advance tax them costs parties. Thus, without aid obtaining defendant, who faces adversary when recipient assistance burden imposes, lacks "a meaningful opportunity heard." 2209-2211. Reversed remanded. Jon C. Blue, New Haven, Conn., appellant. Stephen J. McGovern, Hartford, appellee. Chief Justice BURGER delivered opinion Court. This appeal presents question whether provides actions borne by them, violates Due Process Equal Protection Clauses Amendment applied defendants. 2 * On May 21, 1975, Gloria Streater, Kenyatta Chantel Streater. As assistance, Little Services. See Conn.Gen.Stat. 46b-169 (1981). Common Pleas Haven establish liability support.1 3 At time action commenced, incarcerated Correctional Institution Enfield. Through counsel, legal organization, 52-184 (1977), later became (1981) "[t]he making motion."2 asserted indigent3 expense. App. 8. 4 For "financial reasons," performed even though had been authorized. Id., 12. tried September 28, 1978. Both appellant, still prisoner, testified trial. 14-19.4 listening 2-20. Following subsequent hearing damages, amount $6,974.48, included "lying-in" "accrued maintenance" through October 31, 1978, "costs plus reasonable attorney's fees." Ibid. addition, rate $2 per month—$1 toward arrearage $6,974.48 $1 current monthly award $163.58—directly Finance Control. 20-21.5 5 affirmed court's curiam officially reported. Relying prior decision Ferro Morgan, 35 Conn.Supp. 679, 406 A.2d 873, cert. denied, 177 Conn. 753, 399 526 (1979), held equal protection thus error denial appellant's paid 25-26. 6 Thereafter, petition certification Supreme Court, 180 756, 414 199 (1980); we noted jurisdiction, 449 817, 350, 66 212 (1980). II 7 part: "No . deprive any person life, liberty, property, ." argues right abridged refusal, (1981 ), grant based indigency state-subsidized 8 process, "unlike some rules, technical conception fixed content unrelated time, place circumstances." Joint Anti-Facist Refugee Committee McGrath, 341 123, 162, 71 624, 643, 95 L.Ed. 817 (1951) (concurring opinion). Rather, "flexible calls protections particular situation demands." Morrissey Brewer, 408 471, 481, 92 2593, 2600, 33 484 (1972). Boddie Connecticut, 401 371, 377, 91 780, 785, 28 113 (1971), "due requires, minimum, absent countervailing overriding significance, persons forced settle their claims duty judicial given Accord, Armstrong Manzo, 380 545, 552, 85 1187, 1191, 14 62 (1965); Mullane Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 306, 313, 70 652, 656, 94 865 (1950). 903, 18 (1976), explained: 9 "[I]dentification specific dictates generally requires consideration three distinct factors: First, affected official action; second, deprivation used, finally, Government's interest, including function involved fiscal administrative burdens entail." 10 These standards govern qualify 11 discovery human groups Dr. Karl Landsteiner Vienna beginning century, understanding hereditary aspects, made possible eventual use scientifically evaluate allegations paternity. P. Speiser F. Smekal, 89-93 (1975). Like European counterparts, American courts gradually value cases, modern status has described one commentator follows: 12 "As far accuracy, reliability, dependability—even infallibility—of concerned, there longer controversy. universally accepted distinguished medical authority. There is, fact, living authority repute, legal, may cited adversely. [T]here now practically universal unanimous willingness give decisive controlling weight exclusion paternity." S. Schatkin, Disputed Paternity Proceedings 9.13 13 issue certain properties types: group type individual can determined shortly thereafter; every remain constant throughout life; (c) types inherited accordance Mendel's laws. 5.03. If mother known, impossible true rules inheritance. example, AB cannot have O parent, A, B, parent. Similarly, M unless both parents M, factor rh' appear present parents. §§ 5.03 6.02. Since millions men belong types, conclusively However, demonstrate nonpaternity, alleged belongs AB. It negative rather than affirmative potential ability exonerate innocent fathers confirmed 1976 report developed jointly Bar Association Medical Association. Miale, Jennings, Rettberg, Sell, Krause, AMA-ABA Guidelines: Present Status Serologic Testing Problems Parentage, Family L.Q. 247 (Fall 1976). joint recommended seven "systems" ABO, Rh, MNSs, Kell, Duffy, Kidd, HLA—when investigating questions 257-258. systems "reasonable" provide 91% cumulative probability negating Negro 93% white men. 254, 15 effectiveness attests probative importance heightened "[t]here seldom accurate reliable eyewitnesses since sexual activities usually take intimate surroundings, self-serving questionable reliability." Larson, Blood Test Exclusion Procedures Litigation: Uniform Acts Beyond, J.Fam.L. 713 (1973-1974). BRENNAN wrote member Division Jersey Court: 16 "[I]n field contested truth so often obscured social pressures create conspiracy silence or, worse, induce deliberate falsity. 17 "The wholesome quest administration justice matters gainsaid day. Their reliability indicator fully established. prove paternity, always disprove it, 'they great many cases administered specially qualified experts' Cortese Cortese, N.J.Super. 152, 156, 76 717, 719 B emphasizes that, unlike common dispute between parties, involvement proceeding considerable manifest, giving rise constitutional duty. Because appellee's law compelled her, upon penalty fine imprisonment contempt, "to disclose name oath institute said child." Maher Doe, 432 526, 97 2474, 53 534 (1977); Roe Norton, 422 391, 2221, 45 268 (1975).6 Attorney General automatically action, settlement agreement required approval Commissioner Human Resources Income Maintenance. 46b-160 46b-170 referred mandatory lawyer "for prosecution" fee well all litigation. 10, 20; Tr. Oral Arg. 30, 34, 40.7 payments judgment. 21. "State action" undeniably pervaded case. Accordingly, need not, contend obligation fund indigent's defense ordinary civil litigation 19 nature proceedings also bears heavily claim. Although characterizes "civil," see Robertson Apuzzo, 170 367, 372-373 365 824, 827-828 429 852, 142, 50 126 "quasi-criminal" overtones. Gen.Stat. 46b-171 "is guilty, stand charged maintenance child" (emphasis added); failure comply punishable 46b-171, 46b-215, 53-304 Cf. Walker Stokes, Ohio App.2d 275, 278, 344 N.E.2d 159, 161 (1975); People Doherty, 261 App.Div. 86, 87, 24 N.Y.S.2d 821, 823 (1941). 20 Moreover, unusual obstacle. original "bastardy" enacted 1672, Book Laws Within Jurisdiction (1673), 1702 until 1902 stated pertinent "And woman continue accusation, being put travail, examined cause, Mosher Bennett, 108 671, 672, 144 A. 297 (1929). Booth Hart, 43 480 (1876), construed statutory language 21 "[For 146 years], parties exception testify own behalf. But illegitimate children, brought [a mother] [her] allowed safeguards statute. went should whom declared so, introduced triers charge. existence few facts necessary maintain first instance, proof changed himself accusation other own." 485. 22 1848, Legislature providing "[n]o disqualified witness reason event same, otherwise." 486. precluded testifying behalf, 1848 removed putting complainant travail." form, simply states "if expectant continues respondent Nevertheless, supra, 674, A., 298, held: 23 rely case out constancy accusation. She make travail. places showing innocence charge, our practice do (Emphasis added.) Kelsaw Green, Conn.Cir. 516, 519-520, 276 909, 911-912 (1971).8 Under law, therefore, placed disadvantage plaintiff's Among most might offer essentially denies requiring bear cost. substance, created adverse presumption regarding defendant's elevating accorded imputation him. plaintiff "constant" carries severe penalties meet fails Yet only inextricably responsible imbalance effect forecloses what potentially conclusive means surmount disparity himself. Such irreconcilable command Clause. C 25 Our holding U.S., S.Ct., set forth elements evaluated determining due: suggested safeguard; Analysis those considerations weighs favor. 26 here Apart pecuniary liberty threatened sanctions noncompliance, creation parent-child relationship. frequently stressed familial bonds, legitimized marriage, protection. Stanley Illinois, 405 645, 651-652, 1208, 1212-13, 31 551 Just termination bonds demands fairness, Lassiter 18, 2153, 640 (1981), too imposition. properly endeavors identify born wedlock maintenance. Obviously, compelling accuracy determination.9 27 witnesses, litigants, question. H. Illegitimacy: Law Policy 106-108 (1971). Further, id., 123-137; Part II-A, supra. acknowledged much statutes ordering admissibility findings. n. 2, Unlike susceptible varying interpretation disparagement, results, obtained proper conditions experts, difficult refute. access defendants insure correctness decisions Connecticut. admittedly legitimate welfare receiving securing legally responsible. shares just determination Regulations Agencies 17-82e-4 (1979). concerns; wishes proceed economically and, hence, seeks avoid expense tests.10 Pursuant 42 U.S.C. 655(a)(1) (1976 ed. Supp. III), however, entitled reimbursement 75% expend operation approved plans, regulations promulgated 1302 clear participation development "including tests." CFR 304.20(b)(2)(i)(B)(1980). example states, advanced taxed Ark.Stat.Ann. 34.705.1 (1962); Kan.Stat.Ann. 23-132 (1974); La.Rev.Stat. 9:397.1 (West Supp.1981); N.H.Rev.Stat.Ann. 522:3 Or.Rev.Stat. 109.256(1) (1979); Pa.Cons.Stat.Ann. 6135 (Purdon Tex.Fam.Code Ann. 13.03(b) (Vernon Supp.1980-1981).11 We conclude monetary hardly important here." 2160. 29 Eldridge Without 785.12 Therefore, "the 'fundamental fairness' " expressed Clause satisfied here. 24, 2158. III 30 "[A] invalid operates protected although general validity measure exercise power beyond question." 379, 786. requirement, valid face, offend foreclose party's 380, 787. hold circumstances, Amendment.13 reversed, remanded further inconsistent opinion. So ordered. While pending, merged 51-164s entirety, states: "In issue, court, party, mother, husband submit more physician person, designated determine excluded child. admissible definite motion." affidavit, filed motion, showed weekly income $5, assets. 7. specifically "was afford 23. admitted intimacy doubt relationship another man 17-18. minimal sum presumably incarcerated. subject future increase "[a]ny payment [child] thereafter aside altered issuing order." response interrogatory, attorney, "continuing eligibility [public] [the] identity." 10. disclosure fostered 654(4), directs benefits Aid Families Dependent Children program claimed, undertake best so" secure parent." 232.12 oral argument, Assistant 45. represented "[c]urrently th[is] Connecticut," 46; presented hypothetical situation, illustrated practical rule: "QUESTION: [D]oes mean [if] takes [and says], he's never deviates. He says, I am not. factfinder believes doesn't believe you're saying— "[COUNSEL'S ANSWER]: win." 44. 1974 Services Amendments Security Act, 654, 655, et al., Senate stated: taking position ascertained fair efficient manner, [C]ommittee acknowledges legislation recognize primarily stake convinced assurance, conducted typing." S.Rep.No. 93-1356, p. 52 (1974), U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News, 1974, pp. 8133, 8155. n.6, Laboratories surveyed 1977 study sponsored Health, Education Welfare (now part Health Services) average approximately $245 battery led minimum 80%. HEW Office Child Support Enforcement, Establish 35-37 (1977 Condensed Report). According Hartford Hospital $250 pending increased $460. Brief 4, 5. Other jurisdictions indigents. See, e. g., Ala.Code 26-12-5 D.C.Code 16-2343 (Supp. V 1978); Haw.Rev.Stat. 584-16 (1976); Md.Ann.Code 16-66G (Supp.1980); Mich.Comp.Laws 722.716(c) (1970); Minn.Stat. 257.69(2) N.D.Cent.Code 14-17-15 (Supp.1977); Utah Code 78-25-23 Wis.Stat.Ann. 767.48(5) Supp.1980). highest Colorado, Massachusetts, West Virginia basis indigency. Franklin District 194 Colo. 189, 571 P.2d 1072 Commonwealth Possehl, 355 Mass. 575, 246 667 (1969); ex rel. Graves Daugherty, 266 S.E.2d 142 (W.Va.1980). appears North Carolina proceedings, irrespective means, initially thereof" N.C.Gen.Stat. 8-50.1(b)(2) (Supp.1979). Boddie, prohibits denying divorce inability filing fees costs. United States Kras, 409 434, 93 631, 34 626 (1973), Ortwein Schwab, 410 1172, 572 concluded require waiver seeking discharge bankruptcy appellate review agency resulting reduced benefits. Kras emphasized relief less "fundamental" Boddie. choice alternative forum interests, significant, comparable Ortwein. disposition consider statute, applied,

Category: 1