[cdad]

If your child was born in a big city then usually the city would keep the records otherwise the county has them. If you could get the divorce records from the 2nd divorce that would have the birthdate etc on it if its not currently known to you. Also it would have the conditions listed as to why " mom " didn't get custody if any and if there was any mention or question of the ex being the father.. such as a court statement from " mom " stating.. your not the father anyway. ( being the ex ) That might also help but just remember your in a very grey area.

[cadillac59]

well, that's an interesting angle....I will be sure to look into it.
I just found out that they were re-married in August of 1997.....now my son was born in Oct of 1996, so this shows that they were not married at the time of his birth (which I think is very good news for me)......as far as if and when they were divorced is still up in the air.....I am not finding anything about them being divorced since their re-marriage in 1997......what is your take on this.

as far as them trying to get money from me I have both emails and text messages from the mother saying that I need to send money to her "ex-husband" in order to see my son again.

I just spoke with the lawyer today, and she has told me that I in fact may NOT be able to even sue for paternity if my son already has a "legal father", so that is what I am still trying to find out.......I think that one part is already est in the fact that the mother was NOT marries when she gave birth to my son......I will be looking for the 2nd part, if it exists at all, that the mother was divorced and that the ex-husband was listed as the father of my son in the paperwork.......I will let you know if and when I find anything.

thanks much

"[I]I just spoke with the lawyer today, and she has told me that I in fact may NOT be able to even sue for paternity if my son already has a "legal father"

???? Well, yes. But what does she mean by "legal father"? A presumed 7611 father or one established by judgment? I don't think this comment was helpful.

I think the husband in this case is already a presumed father by virtue of being on the birth certificate (you seem certain he is). You don't have a presumption of paternity going for you so ordinarily you should be unable to challenge the husband's paternity (in other words, you lack standing), which means you lose; however, as I said earlier, we have a case that states there is a constitutional override in certain cases which are factually similar to yours (Michael M v. Giovanna F (1992) 5 Cal. App. 4th 1272). So this may open the door to allow your challenge of paternity.

In re-thinking the matter, I do not think that the fact that the husband may have gone through a divorce with the mom makes much of a difference, even if your son was listed as a child of the marriage in the disso judgment. Unless the issue of paternity were specifically disputed and decided it probably doesn't preclude a challenge that otherwise would have been proper to paternity over you son.

Now whether you will succeed in the long run is another matter. You are going to have to balance the cost (which is high) against the risk of losing (which is also high) and decide if it is worth it. Your case is not a slam dunk because of the long delay in getting into court on this (10 years or more). You waited a long time to take care of business. Sorry, but courts don't like that, even if you otherwise would have had a half-way decent case.

[ScottGem]

I just spoke with the lawyer today, and she has told me that I in fact may NOT be able to even sue for paternity if my son already has a "legal father",

My faith in this lawyer just jumped a notch. That's pretty much what I said earlier.

In reviewing the thread, I think there may be a some hope using the extortion angle. From what you have said, it does appear they are trying to extort money from you to allow you to see your son. That is pretty much a criminal offense. You may be able to turn the tables on them, by telling them you will file criminal extortion charges if they do not let you see your son.