The Georgia Court of Appeals case of Van Amburgh v. Morris (2025) addresses whether or not a putative father can pursue a legitimation when he previously agreed to an annulment that stated no children were born of the marriage.
Key Facts:
- Samuel Van Amburgh and Mallori Morris were married and lived in Texas
- Morris was pregnant when she filed for annulment in March 2020
- Van Amburgh consented to the annulment, which stated “no child was born of the marriage”
- The child was born shortly after the annulment was granted
- In January 2023, Van Amburgh filed a petition in Georgia to establish paternity and legitimation
- Morris moved to dismiss the petition based on several grounds, including res judicata (meaning the matter was already legally settled)
Main Issue: The core question was whether Van Amburgh could pursue paternity and legitimation rights after previously agreeing to an annulment that stated no children were born of the marriage.
Court’s Decision: The Court of Appeals:
- Vacated (canceled) the trial court’s dismissal of Van Amburgh’s petition
- Determined that the annulment decree did not automatically prohibit Van Amburgh from later seeking to establish paternity
- Found the annulment language was ambiguous since the child hadn’t been born yet when the annulment was granted
Key Reasoning:
- While annulments and previous court decisions can sometimes prevent future paternity claims, this case was different because the child wasn’t born when the annulment was granted
- The Georgia Court of Appeals found that the trial court erred in determining the abandonment of opportunity interest without conducting an evidentiary hearing
In Simple Terms: The court essentially said that just because Van Amburgh agreed to an annulment before the child was born doesn’t mean he permanently gave up his right to try to establish paternity or legitimate the child later. The case was sent back to the lower court for further consideration rather than being completely dismissed and for the trial court to have an evidentiary hearing to first determine whether Van Amburgh abandoned his opportunity interest in legitimation prior to addressing the remainder of his petition, if necessary.