MILLER V. MILLER 478 A.2d 351 (1984) CASE BRIEF

MILLER V. MILLER

478 A.2d 351 (1984)

NATURE OF THE CASE: Jay Miller (D), step-father, sought review of an order that required D to pay child support for two children of Gladys Miller (P), D's ex-wife. D also objected to the distribution of marital assets.

FACTS: P was originally married to Ralph Febre. Two children were born of that marriage. Michelle, born July, 1963, and Suzette, born July, 1966. Shortly after Suzette's birth in 1966, P separated from Ralph; she divorced him in 1969. Ralph continued to support P and the children after the couple's separation until he went to prison on a narcotics charge in 1968. Immediately before going to prison, Ralph gave Gladys $5,000 for the support of his daughters. While he was in prison and after he was released, he continued to express his concern for his children. P married D on December 16, 1972 while Ralph was in prison. No children were born of their marriage. P's two daughters by her prior marriage lived with P and D. P and D separated on December 12, 1979. After his release, Ralph told P that he wanted to support his daughters. However, when he did send a check to the girls, D tore it up. D testified that he refused Ralph's money because he was concerned that he and P 'would be tied to his illegal activities,' presumably meaning Ralph's narcotics activities. Ralph eventually stopped attempting to send money to the children. D supported the children and even claimed them as dependents on his 1979 tax return, which he filed after he separated from their mother. During all this time, Ralph did not support the children. P filed for divorce. D was not the natural or adoptive father of P's daughters. P sought child support from D for her children. P alleged that D had induced the girls to rely on him as their natural father, to their emotional and financial detriment. By so doing, he had prevented and cut off the girls' relationship with their natural father. P claimed that D was equitably estopped from denying a duty to pay child support. D claimed that although he stood in loco parentis to the children during his marriage, he was merely their stepfather and any legal relationship he had with the children terminated with his divorce from their mother. The trial court agreed with P. D was equitably estopped from denying his duty to support the girls, and required him to pay child support of $75 per week per child. D had knowingly and intentionally fostered a bona fide parental relationship with the girls, so that in their minds he became their father. Therefore, he could not avoid the financial obligations flowing from that relationship. The Appellate Division affirmed because it found that D had actively interfered with the normal relationship between the girls and their natural father to the girls' emotional and financial detriment. This appeal was taken.

ISSUE:

RULE OF LAW:

HOLDING AND DECISION:

LEGAL ANALYSIS:

Get free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online

for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.

https://bsmsphd.com

© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner