Uniform Parentage Act

Ex parte Z.W.E., [Ms. 1190748, Mar. 26, 2021], ___ So. 3d ___ (Ala. 2021). A per curiam plurality opinion (Mendheim and Stewart, JJ., concur; Bolin and Sellers, JJ., concur specially; Parker, C.J., and Wise and Bryan, JJ., concur in the result; Shaw and Mitchell, JJ., dissent) concludes on certiorari review that “[t]he Court of Civil Appeals did not err in concluding that the plain language of the AUPA does not include unborn children within its definition of ‘child.’ Accordingly, the alleged father cannot be considered a presumed father under § 26-17-204(a)(5) and, thus, does not have the capacity to challenge the husband’s status as a presumed father of the child.” Ms. *20.

Related Documents


Contact Us Today

  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • Please enter your phone number.
    This isn't a valid phone number.
  • Please enter your email address.
    This isn't a valid email address.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please enter a message.