RICHARD CROSBY STRICKLAND, APPELLANT,
v.
BARBARA J. STRICKLAND, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court erred in granting partial summary judgment because the HLA test results, while indicating a high probability of paternity, were not conclusive proof and raised genuine issues of material fact regarding paternity.
In a paternity action, the appellee sought to establish the appellant as the father of her child. The appellant's motions to add parties and compel me…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Paternity Action cases and more on FLexlaw
CAMPBELL, Judge.
Appellant, Richard Crosby Strickland, appeals the partial summary judgment granted in favor of appellee, Barbara J. Strickland. We agree with appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in granting partial summary judgment in favor of appellee on the issue of liability and reverse the trial court’s order. This is a paternity action whereby appel-lee sought to have appellant declared the father of her child. Appellant made sever al motions to add parties and compel medical examinations, all of which were denied on the basis of the results of appellant’s Human Leukocyte Antigen (HLA) reading which indicated a 99.03% probability that he was the father of the child. In the depositions filed in support of the motion for partial summary judgment, two physicians testified that the results of appellant’s HLA test were not conclusive proof of paternity.
A trial judge may not, on a motion for summary judgment, make determinations involving the weight of the evidence or the credibility of witnesses. The party moving for summary judgment must successfully meet the burden of proving conclusively the nonexistence of genuine issues of material facts. Landers v. Milton, 370 So. 2d 368 (Fla.1979); Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla.1966). Proof of a high degree of probability does not meet that burden. Accordingly, the partial summary judgment entered in favor of appellee is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
RYDER, C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hernandez v. United Auto. Ins. Co., Inc., 730 So. 2d 344 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…v. Gant, 460 So. 2d 912, 913 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (holding that “[i]t goes without saying that a trial judge may not, on motion for summary judgment, make eviden-tiary determinations involving the credibility of witnesses.”); Strickland v. Strickland, 456 So. 2d 583, 584 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984) (reasoning that “[a] trial judge may not, on a motion for summary judgment, make determinations involving the weight of the evidence or the credibility of witnesses.”). It is clear to us that the question of whether Mr. Torre…
-
First N. Am. Nat'l Bank v. Hummel, 825 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…a summary judgment must conclusively demonstrate that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.510; Holl v. Talcott, 191 So. 2d 40, 43 (Fla.1966); Strickland v. Strickland, 456 So. 2d 583, 584 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Once the moving party meets its burden, then the party opposing entry of a summary judgment must prove the existence of genuine triable issues. Holl, 191 So. 2d at 43-44. In seeking summary judgment, FNANB met its burden by…
-
Arme Joyner v. Coley Hair, 485 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)…blood test is scientifically proven to exclude ninety-nine per cent of all men who could not have fathered the child. The one per cent margin of error is a sufficient reason why the test cannot be solely determinative. See Strickland v. Strickland, 456 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). The parties should have the opportunity to present to the court any other evidence which is relevant and material. Affirmed as modified. . As a condition to receiving benefits for dependent children the mother-applicant must as…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gory Roofing Tile Mfg., Inc. v. Davison, 191 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1966)
- Irving W. Landers et ux. v. Adelle L. Milton, 370 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 1979)