[pavvintz]

If the mother petitioner wrongly raises the issue of "res judicata" in a trial brief... and tries to assert that an EX-PARTE foreign court decree that determined a status of non paternity on her Ex-Husband was valid......wouldn't that then legally bar her from coming to a court in the US to "establish" another man as a parent ?
AS you can't dis-establish a presumed father without establishing another father in the same hearing.
If the US court recognizes the foreign decree as valid then the US court can't have jurisdictiion ?

[Mr. Knowitall]

Why would a prior finding of non-paternity prevent a subsequent action to establish paternity?

[pavvintz]

I thought res judicata meant you couldn't relitigate the issue...so if a foreign court had subject matter jurisdiction ? How can you retry the subject ?

[lwpat]

Res Judicata only applies to the same parties.

Pav are all your issues the same? You have started nine threads at least 7 have something to do with paternity or related. I am wondering if your just asking the same questions but adding new spin?

[pavvintz]

No spin, just new issues come into play...by the other side, introducing new stuff......So just trying to understand the legal concepts at play. If a foreign country claims subject matter jurisdiction and "tries to establish a man is a father without him present to defend himself, as he was not made a party to that hearing, thus disestablishing the presumed father. Then the mother can't relitigate the issue if another court decided the issue.

Your going to need more than a legal website. Your going to need an Attorney familar with international law

[Mr. Knowitall]

Why? To explain to him that wishful thinking isn't a valid legal doctrine in any nation?

[pavvintz]

Oh ...so that must explain why the judge felt it was proper to make the EX-Husband be a party to the hearings to determine paternity?