Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 3/19/1990

John M. v. Paula T.

Citations

571 A.2d 1380
524 Pa. 306
87 A.L.R. 4th 555
1990 Pa. LEXIS 69

How courts have described this case

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

giving notice, in footnote, that henceforth it would use phrase “ ‘presumption that a child bom to a married woman is a child of the marriage,’ ” instead of “ ‘illegitimate’ ” child
referring to the constitutional guarantee of “clear privacy interests in preserving [] bodily integrity”
in determining whether there is “good cause” for court-ordered blood tests under Pa.R.C.P. 4010(a), the court balances interests
in determining whether there is \good cause\ for court-ordered blood tests under Pa.R.C.P. 4010(a), the court balances interests
“The person whose blood is sought has clear privacy interests in preserving his or her bodily integrity.”
Supreme Court reiterates that Commonwealth’s interest lies in protecting the family, “the basic and foundational unit of society”; cases involving the principle of “paternity by estoppel” highlight this interest

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Nix, Larsen, Flaherty, McDermott, Zappala, Papadakos

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named John M. v. Paula T.

3 other CourtListener records share this case 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.