Findings and Conclusions About Parentage

Findings and Conclusions about Parentage (after Acknowledgment or Earlier Court Decision)

Superior Court of Washington, County of

In re parentage:

Petitioner (person who started this case):

And Respondents (current legal parents):

Children over age 2:

No.

Findings and Conclusions about Parentage

(after Acknowledgment or Earlier Court Decision)

1. Basis for findings and conclusions (check all that apply):

Parties’ agreement

Default Order or Summary Judgment Order (date):

Order after Sexual Assault Fact-Finding Hearing on (date):

Trial for this case on (date): , with the following people present (check all that apply):

2. Notice and Personal Jurisdiction

All people with a right to receive notice of this case were served with the Summons and Petition. except (name/s):

(Check all that apply):

(Name/s) was/were served in this state.

(Name/s) live/s in this state now.

(Name/s) lived in this state with the children.

(Name/s) lived in this state and paid for pregnancy costs or support for the children.

(Name/s) did or said something that caused the children to live in this state.

(Name/s) had sex in this state, which may have produced the children.

(Name/s) signed an agreement to join this Petition or other document agreeing that the court can decide his or her rights in this case.

None of the reasons listed above apply to (name):

Other (specify):

Conclusion: The court has personal jurisdiction over all parties to this case. except (name/s):

3. Parentage originally established (Repeat this section for each child as needed.)

By Court Order – Parentage was established by court order for (children’s names): on (date): by (name of court):

Petitioner (check one): was was not included as a party in that court case.

By Paternity Acknowledgment – The Respondents signed a Paternity Acknowledgment (Affidavit) for (child’s name): that was filed with the appropriate agency of the state of on (date):

The mother was married or in a registered domestic partnership when the child was born (or within 300 days before). Her spouse/partner (name):

signed a Denial of Paternity that was filed with the appropriate agency of the state of on (date)

Petitioner (check one): did did not sign that Paternity Acknowledgment/Denial of Paternity.

Conclusion: The Petitioner (check one): has the right to bring this case because he was not involved in the court order or acknowledgment that originally established parentage. does not have the right to bring this case because he was involved in the court order or acknowledgment that originally established parentage. The Petition should be denied.

4. Deadline to file Petition

The Petition to Decide Parentage (after Acknowledgment or Court Decision) was first filed or served on (date):

This date is (check one): within four years of more than four years after:

the date a Court decided who the children’s legal parents were, or

the date a Paternity Acknowledgement was filed (or the child’s birthdate, if the child was born after the Paternity Acknowledgement was filed).

Conclusion: The Petition was filed (check one): before the four-year deadline. after the four-year deadline and should be denied.

5. Guardian ad Litem

No Guardian ad Litem (GAL) was appointed.

The Court appointed (name): Guardian ad Litem (GAL) for (children’s names):

The court has considered the report and recommendations of the GAL.

The GAL should be discharged.

Other (specify):

6. Genetic Testing Admitted

Does not apply. Either genetic testing was not done, or the results were not admitted. (Skip to 7.)

This issue was decided in the Summary Judgment Order signed by the court on (date): . (Skip to 7.)

The following genetic testing results were admitted as evidence (check all that apply):

Petitioner Tested – Genetic paternity testing was done with the Petitioner (name):

The testing was done by (check one): court order. agreement with the Respondents.

The test results (check one): show a 99% or greater probability that the Petitioner is the biological parent of (children’s names): exclude Petitioner as a biological parent of (children’s names):

Respondent Tested – Genetic paternity testing was done with the Respondent (name):

The testing was done by (check one): court order agreement of the Respondents.

The test results (check one): show a 99% or greater probability that this Respondent is the biological parent of (children’s names): exclude this Respondent as a biological parent of (children’s names):

Test Results Challenged – The genetic paternity test results were challenged by (name): . The court concludes that the challenged test results (check one): are are not valid because (specify):

Conclusion: (Check one): The court should decide parentage according to the genetic test results described above. The court should not decide parentage according to the genetic test results described above because the court found the test results are invalid. The court should not decide parentage according to the genetic test results described above based on the Order after Sexual Assault Fact-Finding Hearing.

7. Genetic Testing Not Admitted

Does not apply. Genetic testing results were admitted. (Skip to 8.)

This issue was decided in the Summary Judgment Order signed by the court on (date): . (Skip to 8.)

Genetic testing was not done, or the results were not admitted.

Conclusion: (Check all that apply):

Not Ordered – The children have an Acknowledged or Adjudicated Parent. The court concludes that ordering genetic testing is not in the children’s best interest after considering the report and recommendation of the children’s Guardian ad Litem.

This conclusion is based on the following (check all that apply):

See Order on Motion for Genetic Testing.

(Describe clear and convincing evidence why testing is not in the child’s best interest):

Not Admitted – The children have an Acknowledged or Adjudicated Parent. Genetic testing results were not admitted because the testing was done without either a court order or agreement of the Birth Mother and the Acknowledged or Adjudicated Parent.

No Cooperation – (Name): did not cooperate with an order for genetic testing. This conclusion is based on the following facts (describe the failure to cooperate):

Because this person did not cooperate with genetic testing, the court concludes that he (check one): should should not be the legal father of the children. RCW 26.26.575(2). This is in the child’s best interest because (explain):

Other (specify):

8. Children’s Names

The children’s names should not be changed.

The children’s names should be changed as listed on the Final Parentage Order (after Acknowledgment or earlier Court Decision).

9. Jurisdiction over the children (RCW 26.27.201 – .221, .231, .261, .271)

The court can approve a Parenting Plan or Residential Schedule for these children and decide who the children should live with most of the time because (check all that apply; if a box applies to all of the children, you may write “the children” instead of listing names):

Exclusive, continuing jurisdiction – A Washington court has already made a custody order or parenting plan for the children, and the court still has authority to make other orders for (children’s names):

Home state jurisdiction – Washington is the children’s home state because (check all that apply):

(Children’s names): lived in Washington with a parent or someone acting as a parent for at least the 6 months just before this case was filed, or if the children were less than 6 months old when the case was filed, they had lived in Washington with a parent or someone acting as a parent since birth.

There were times the children were not in Washington in the 6 months just before this case was filed (or since birth if they were less than 6 months old), but those were temporary absences.

(Children’s names): do not live in Washington right now, but Washington was the children’s home state some time in the 6 months just before this case was filed, and a parent or someone acting as a parent of the children still lives in Washington.

(Children’s names): do not have another home state.

No home state or home state declined – No court of any other state (or tribe) has the jurisdiction to make decisions for (children’s names): , or a court in the children’s home state (or tribe) decided it is better to have this case in Washington and:

The children and a parent or someone acting as a parent have ties to Washington beyond just living here; and

There is a lot of information (substantial evidence) about the children’s care, protection, education and relationships in this state.

Other state declined – The courts in other states (or tribes) that might be (children’s names): ’s home state have refused to take this case because it is better to have this case in Washington.

Temporary emergency jurisdiction – Washington had temporary emergency jurisdiction over (children’s names): when the case was filed, and now has jurisdiction to make a final custody decision because:

The children were abandoned in this state, or the children were in this state and the children (or children’s parent, brother or sister) was abused or threatened with abuse;

The court signed a temporary order on (date) saying that Washington’s jurisdiction will become final if no case is filed in the children’s home state (or tribe) by the time the children have been in Washington for 6 months;

The children have now lived in Washington for 6 months; and

No case concerning the children has been started in the children’s home state (or tribe).

Other reason (specify):

The court cannot approve a Parenting Plan or Residential Schedule for (children’s names): or decide who the children should live with most of the time because the court does not have jurisdiction over these children.

10. Parenting Plan or Residential Schedule

The court has jurisdiction over the children as listed in section 9 above. (Check one):

The court signed the final Parenting Plan or Residential Schedule filed separately today or on (date):

No one requested a Parenting Plan or Residential Schedule. The children have been living with (name): most of the time. The children should continue to live with this parent most of the time. This parent should be named the children’s custodian.

The plan, schedule or custodian is approved (check one):

by default. The court considered the court record.

by agreement of both parents without a contested hearing. The court considered the parties’ agreement and the following evidence, if any:

after a summary judgment hearing. The court considered the evidence listed in the Summary Judgment Order.

after trial. The court considered all of the evidence admitted at trial.

The court has jurisdiction over the children as listed in section 9 above. No Parenting Plan or Residential Schedule should be entered based on the Order after Sexual Assault Fact-Finding Hearing.

The court does not have jurisdiction over the children as listed in section 9 above. Therefore, the court cannot approve a Parenting Plan or Residential Schedule, or decide who the children should live with most of the time.

Other (specify):

11. Child Support

The children should be supported according to state law. The court signed the final Child Support Order and Worksheets filed separately today or on (date):

No child support should be established or collected based on the Order after Sexual Assault Fact-Finding Hearing.

The court is not making a decision about child support now because:

Other (specify):

12. Protection Order

No one requested an Order for Protection in this case.

(Name): requested an Order for Protection in this case.

Conclusion: The court should (check one):

not approve an Order for Protection because:

approve an Order for Protection because:

13. Restraining Order

No one requested a Restraining Order in this case.

(Name): requested a Restraining Order.

Conclusion: The court should:

not approve a Restraining Order because:

approve a Restraining Order because:

14. Fees and Costs

Each party should pay his or her own fees and costs.

This issue was decided in the Summary Judgment Order signed by the court on (date): . (Skip to 15.)

Lawyer’s fees were awarded in the Order after Sexual Assault Fact-Finding Hearing and should be included in the Final Parentage Order.

(Name): incurred fees and costs, and needs help to pay those fees and costs. (Name): has the ability to help pay fees and costs and should be ordered to pay the amount as listed in the Final Parentage Order. The court finds that the amount ordered is reasonable.

Fees for a guardian ad litem (GAL) or other court-appointed professional should be paid as listed in the Final Parentage Order. The court has considered relevant factors including each party’s ability to pay, and finds the fees as ordered are reasonable.

Other findings:

15. Other findings or conclusions (if any)

Petitioner and Respondent/s or their lawyers fill out below.