Michael H. v. Gerald D.
United States Supreme Court
491 U.S. 110 (1989)
Gerald D. (defendant) and Carole D. were married and living together in California when Carole had an affair with her neighbor, Michael H. (plaintiff), and conceived a child, Victoria. DNA testing showed a 98.7% chance Michael was Victoria's biological father. After Carole and Gerald separated and reconciled multiple times, Michael repeatedly sought to establish paternity and secure visitation rights, at one point even reaching a signed agreement with Carole acknowledging Victoria as their daughter, before Carole reconciled with Gerald again. California law provided that a child born to a wife cohabiting with a husband who is not impotent or sterile is conclusively presumed to be the husband's child. Gerald moved for summary judgment on that basis, and the California Superior Court granted it, rejecting Michael's paternity and visitation claims; the California Court of Appeal upheld the statute's constitutionality, and Michael appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Whether a state statute that conclusively presumes a child born into an existing marriage is the husband's child, thereby preventing a likely biological father from establishing paternity, violates the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.