Legal Document

483 U.S. 574 107 S.Ct. 3001 97 L.Ed.2d 473 Gregory L. RIVERA, Appellantv.Jean Marie MINNICH. No. 86-98. Argued March 25, 1987. Decided June Syllabus Appellee, an unmarried mother, filed a child-support suit in Pennsylvania court against appellant, alleging that he was the child's father. The judge denied appellant's pretrial motion seeking ruling Due Process Clause of Fourteenth Amendment violated by state statute providing burden proving paternity "shall be preponderance evidence," and requesting jury instruction must established clear convincing evidence. Applying standard, found appellant father, but later reconsidered his on proof issue granted for new trial. Supreme Court held constitutional reinstated jury's verdict. Held: Pennsylvania's standard determining is constitutionally permissible. applied most frequently litigation between private parties every State and, more specifically, majority American jurisdictions regard such proceedings as civil nature (as does Pennsylvania). Such legislative judgment entitled to powerful presumption validity when challenged under Clause. This case not controlled holding Santosky v. Kramer, 455 745, 102 1388, 71 599 (1982), Constitution requires evidence before may terminate parental relationship. Appellant's contention contrary rests erroneous tacit assumption equivalence State's imposition legal obligations accompanying biological relationship parent child termination fully existing parent-child collective many legislatures adhere legitimate significant distinctions proceedings. Pp. 577-582. 509 Pa. 588, 506 A.2d 879 (1986), affirmed. STEVENS, J., delivered opinion Court, which REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, POWELL, SCALIA, JJ., joined. O'CONNOR, concurring judgment, post, p. ----. BRENNAN, dissenting opinion, William Watt Campbell, Lancaster, Pa., appellant. Mary Louise Barton, appellee. Justice STEVENS Court. 1 governing brought defendant establish born out wedlock specifies "burden shall evidence."1 appeal presents question whether determination evidentiary complies with Amendment. We agree conclusion applying this 2 * On May 28, 1983, appellee Jean Minnich, woman, gave birth Cory Michael Minnich. Three weeks later, complaint support Common Pleas Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, Rivera, father her son. In advance trial requested rule statutory instruct motion. unanimously child. post-trial motions, Appellee appealed directly (1986). 3 noted enactments are valid, same approved suits Then, after reviewing respective interests putative child,2 well "the interest Commonwealth seeing fathers their children who so those do become public charges," concluded one "does unduly risk deprivation any them."3 Chief dissented. Relying our relationship, reasoned degree should required create relationship.4 probable jurisdiction, 479 960, 454, 93 400 now affirm. II 4 Legislature has prescribed cases State.5 More it nature.6 A only consistent "dominant opinion" throughout country also accord traditions people law," see Lochner New York, 198 45, 76, 25 539, 547, 49 L.Ed. 937 (1905) (Holmes, dissenting), 5 converse proposition principal reason mandated departure from been adoption exacting jurisdictions. each three we have legislature unconstitutional, imposed Thus, explaining criminal charge beyond reasonable doubt required, stated: 6 "Although virtually unanimous adherence reasonable-doubt common-law conclusively requirement due process, 'reflect profound about way law enforced justice administered.' Duncan Louisiana, 391 145, 155, 88 1444, 1450, 20 491 (1968)." re Winship, 397 358, 361-362, 90 1068, 1070-1071, 368 (1970). 7 Similarly, Addington Texas, 441 418, 99 1804, 60 323 (1979), rejection Texas' argument sufficient proceeding commit individual mental hospital involuntarily supported fact States had chosen apply either id., at 431-432, nn. 6, 7, 8, S.Ct., 1812, or even demanding 430-431, n. 5, 5. And presented York could extinguish pre-existing without requiring greater factual certainty than fair evidence, began analysis noting 38 higher rights. U.S., 749-750, 1392-1393. 8 it. view unable accept assumption. 9 First, there important difference ultimate results two Resolving causal connection alleged physical act subsequent plaintiff's impose financial liability will trammel preexisting rights; no right certainly liberty avoiding natural validly law. typical contested proceeding, defendant's nonadmission represents disavowal training, nurture, loving protection heart protected Constitution. See Lehr Robertson, 463 248, 261, 103 2985, 2993, 77 614 (1983).7 Rather, primary serious economic consequences flow order establishes its correlative obligation provide contrast, destroy permanently all recognition Santosky, described parent's desire for, to, companionship, care, custody "an far precious property right." 758-759, 1397. ought stripped abrogates aspects interest. types thus related appropriately required. For, said explanation need certain proceedings, "rights once confirmed lightly revoked." Schneiderman United States, 320 118, 125, 63 1333, 1336, 87 1796 (1943). 10 Second, distinction parties' other As true demands mere contestants individual. Because superior resources, 763, 1400, because adverse criminal, commitment, especially severe individuals affected, appropriate society upon itself disproportionate share error 370-372, 1075-1076 (Harlan, concurring); Addington, 427, 1810; 766, 1401. Unlike adversaries mother whom extremely important, nevertheless relatively equal, outcome. Each would suffer similar ruling; thus, roughly equally inaccurate determination. Nor favor placing party. Surely, point view, lower increases possibility while mistaken finding assume responsibility support. equipoise stake supports normally these cases.8 11 Finally, finality proceeding. pointed "natural parents 'double jeopardy' defense" repeated efforts 764, 1400. If initially fails win termination, did case, 751, 4, 1393, always can try again family circumstances change gathers better "[E]ven attained level fitness State, they means forestall future efforts." Id., protects parents, some child, renewed sever familial ties. terminates entry final bars normal principles litigation. There "striking asymmetry [the parties'] options." Ibid. 12 therefore 13 Affirmed. 14 judgment. 15 I believe affirmed reasons set forth REHNQUIST dissent 770-791, 1403-1414, (1982). "Both theory precedents teach us solicitude interests, particularly field family-property arrangements." Yazell, 382 341, 352, 86 500, 506, 404 (1966). Particularly ldght special solicitude, cannot find flexible concept supra, 774-776, 1405-1406 (REHNQUIST, litigants bear equal fashion. necessary rely does. Cf. ante, 577—578. differences substantial enough justify different reached Santosky. Accordingly, concur Court's opinion. 16 dissenting. 17 resolution " 'a monetary dispute parties.' Ante, 577—578, quoting 423, 1808, (1979). What merely prospect discrete payment satisfaction limited obligation. lifelong financial, legal, moral dimensions. 18 Financially, ongoing, open-ended responsibility. responsible supporting least until 18, see, e.g., 23 Pa.Cons.Stat. § 4321(2) (1985), perhaps longer. 4321(3). amount necessary, depend needs particular over years. 4322. Uniform Marriage Divorce Act, 9A U.L.A. 309 (1979 Supp.1987). receives form assistance, father's real personal deemed available reimbursement. Pa.Stat.Ann., Tit. 62, 1974 (1968 commitment losing onerous unpredictable borne loser suit. 19 created sanctions. Failure comply result attachment income, 4348 10% penalty arrears 30 days if failure pay willful. 4348(c). addition, federal income tax refunds confiscated arrearages. 42 U.S.C. 664 (1982 ed., Supp. III); 4307 (1985). Furthermore, satisfy incarceration. delinquent declared contempt imprisoned up six months, 4345, guilty misdemeanor punishable imprisonment §§ 4304, 1104 duty whose exposes potential loss both liberty. "Apart pecuniary threatened possible sanctions noncompliance, creation relationship." Little Streater, 452 1, 13, 101 2202, 2209, 68 627 (1981). pronouncement It declaration assumes cultural role distinct expectations. Most parenthood status responsibilities wellspring decree. Some men emotional resonance fatherhood. Many, however, come themselves differently, necessarily expand boundaries sensibility encompass own. establishment outset fewer one. has, process engagement cumulative, duration spans lifetime. respect, akin involved breach contract.1 21 subject characterization others sought shirk actions. See, County Hennepin Brinkman, 378 N.W.2d 790, 794, (Minn.1985) (" '[T]he social stigma resulting adjudication ignored' ") (citation omitted); Tennessee Dept. Human Services Vaughn, 595 S.W.2d 67 (Tenn.1980) (losing "branded bearer bastard child"); Jacobs, 220 Pa.Super. 31, 37, 279 251, 254 (1971) ("Inevitably, labeled community following judicial acknowledgment parents' impropriety"). He seen apparently impervious role, instead coerced fulfill Regardless satisfying ultimately develops, person initial participation involuntary. By party rarely target opprobrium.2 22 implicates defendant. These significantly burdening State. Modern blood-grouping tests, human leukocyte antigen (HLA) test used reliable cases. generally Sussman, Paternity Testing Blood Grouping (2d ed. 1976). probability instance, calculated 94.6%, Brief 2, achieved quite through use tests. Jones Robinson, 229 Va. 276, 282, 329 S.E.2d 798 (1985) (probability 99.97% "at least" 99% consolidated appeals). likely proved make practical blood were introduced cases, what wrote 35 years ago still true: "in . truth often obscured pressures conspiracy silence or, worse, induce deliberate falsity." Cortese Cortese, N.J.Super. 152, 156, 76 717, 719 (1950). Recognition fact, gravity imposing defendant, lead require 24 respectfully dissent. Stat.Ann., 42, 6704(g) (Purdon 1982): "Trial Paternity—Where disputed, made unless jury. trial, demanded, paternity. evidence." (Emphasis supplied.) repealed October 30, 1985; successor provides action 4343(a) "The being hand bringing into world. him direct assistance concern part having stranger heir thereby giving inter alia, estate, Social Security Benefits. health, welfare education wedlock, hand, knowing care him. concerns include known belonging line descent knowledge benefits detriments inheritable line. Further, able receiving help, otherwise, raising caring wedlock. She parents." 593-594, A.2d, 882. 596-597, 883. Earlier fully: infant citizens them. furnishing capable concerned tends reduce keeping minor children, financially parent, off rolls, identifiable recovery payments paid wedlock." 594, 600, 885. "[T]he involv[es] parties. Since minimal outcome suits, fashion." E. Cleary, McCormick Evidence 956 (3d 1984) (preponderance applies general run issues cases"). Am.Jur.2d, Bastards 837, 922 (1983); National Conference Legislatures, Best Interest Child: Guide Child Support Laws 102-103 few stringent action. Wayne Williams, N.Y.2d 658, 660, N.Y.S.2d 523, 468 N.E.2d 705 (1984); E.E. F.F., 106 App.Div.2d 694, 748 (1984) (clear evidence); Va.Code 20-61.1 (Supp.1986); 287, 800 (proof doubt). "When unwed demonstrates full 'com[ing] forward participate rearing child,' Caban [v. Mohammed, 380, 392, 1760, 1768, 297 (1979) ], contact acquires At 'act[s] toward children.' 389, 1766, 7. But existence link merit equivalent protection. actions judges neither nor genetic bonds." 2993. place reliance relevant, weigh proof. impartial disputes, including served independent judiciary, presumably resolves disputes unaffected minimizing expenditures. Its domicile, McKenna McKenna, 282 422 668 (1980); reformation contract grounds mistake, Boyertown Bank Hartman, 147 558, A. 842 (1892); possession, Stevenson Stein, 412 478, 195 268 (1963); claim wages services rendered decedent, Mooney's Estate, 328 273, 194 893 (1937). Of course, stigmatized illegitimate. stressed, illegitimate status. Trimble Gordon, 430 762, 1459, 52 31 (1977). attaches reflects regarding culpability. discuss, infra, page, legitimation burdened employment "clear convincing" standard.

Classification Label: 3