Skip to main content

Daniel v. Daniel

Citations

  • 695 So. 2d 1253
  • 1997 WL 333900

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • recognizing that, where child was born during an intact marriage, her status as a “legitimate” child would not be affected by any paternity determination
  • noting “the parties stipulated that Michael Daniel was not the biological father of the child”
  • limiting Privette to “those instances where a child faces the threat of being declared illegitimate, and the ‘legal father’ also faces the threat of losing parental rights which he seeks to maintain”
  • declining to apply the Privette test in a dissolution of marriage action where the husband raised the issue of paternity, the parties stipulated that the child was not biologically related to the husband, and the husband had never committed to supporting the child
  • recognizing Daniel’s limitation of Privette

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

42 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.