Hawaii Revised Statutes 584. Uniform Parentage Act

Case Notes

By their plain language, 584-1 and 584-3 do not state that this chapter is the exclusive means by which paternity must be established; thus, this chapter is not the exclusive means by which a determination of paternity can be made. 99 H. 1, 52 P.3d 255.

The enactment of this chapter: (1) does not displace the Hawaii supreme court's previous decision in Blackshear; (2) does not prevent a proper litigant in a paternity action from asserting defenses based upon res judicata and equitable estoppel; and, (3) a final judgment, including a divorce decree, can serve as the basis for such defenses. 99 H. 1, 52 P.3d 255.

The term "may", as set forth in 560:2-114(a), is permissive, and, for purposes of intestate succession, a purported heir may establish his or her parent-child relationship with the decedent by any means permitted by statute, including, but not limited to, this chapter. 103 H. 275, 81 P.3d 1190.

This chapter did not implicate father's fundamental privacy right to procreational autonomy, but rather father's economic interest in not supporting his child, and although father had standing to raise an equal protection challenge to this chapter, that standing was based on a non-suspect classification, i.e., the biological relationship of fathers to their children; thus, because this chapter bears a rational relation to the public welfare, the statute survives rational basis review and father's privacy and equal protection arguments failed. 109 H. 240, 125 P.3d 461.

Last modified: October 27, 2016