ÿWPC4! …# VU>a %Ÿ 0(¥4Íáðw@ø 0L8 0l„ 0Dð 4 0J< 0T† 0^Ú 0h8 0r  0| 0†Ž 0 1u¤ 0dU 6}B)³ 0NÜDC* AMmU*º Bä D3ºDv~þ 0@|vÓ¼ AOÆÞ 0D¤ D/è B!˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀäÌÀÀÌÀä0 <èÀ( 9Z &Courier RegularX($¡¡DÒ xx°°3|xï  Ý Þ ß Dà á {â ã Dä Då Ó€ï > ÿÿ$Small Circleððà0 à((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d>‡¦$"Small Circleð"ðà0  à####7Border 1dd€-%Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial d Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÔ€'ÔÔ€'ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€'XÔÌÌOctober€18,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó(((('ÿÿdxd °Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€"ôÔThisÏse ovisions€of€subsection€(a),€a€person€wishing€to€legitimate€a€child€may€obtain€an€orderÏof€legitimation€for€a€child€born€to€an€unmarried€woman€by€filing€with€the€court€aÏcertified€copy€or€a€duplicate€original€of€the€acknowledgment€of€paternity€asÏprescribed€under€ðð€24„7„118,€ðð€68„3„203(g),€ðð€68„3„302,€or€ðð€68„3„305(b).€€Further,€aÏduplicate€original€of€the€voluntary€acknowledgment€of€paternity€filed€with€theÏjuvenile€court€by€a€birthing€institution€pursuant€to€the€provisions€of€ðð€68„3„302(e)Ïshall€be€the€basis€for€the€entry€of€an€order€of€legitimation€by€the€court.€€Subject€toÏthe€provisions€of€ðð€24„7„118,€the€court€shall€enter€an€order€of€legitimation€upon€theÏfiling€of€the€voluntary€acknowledgment€of€paternity€in€either€of€the€above€situations.Ìà8 à€€(c)€Nothing€herein€shall€be€construed€to€authorize€a€putative€father€toÏlegitimate€a€child€or€to€execute€any€voluntary€acknowledgment€ofÏpaternity€without€the€consent€of€the€mother€of€such€child.ÌÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„2„202€(Supp.€1995).ÌPtPtHPð€ÿÜÿìô”(üHPð€P € €'("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÓ ` Ü‚Xœ ’X ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€^tXdÈdÈ7ÑÑ  Ñ›IN€THE€MATTER€OF:à à)Ìà àà à)ÌSEAN€MICHAEL€CRAWFORD,€a€minorà à)Ìunder€18€years€of€ageà à)Ìà àà à)ÌTHOMAS€MATTHEW€CIHLAR,à à)Ìà àà à)ÌÓ#` Ü‚Xœôx‘X#Óà àPetitioner/Appellee,à à)à àAppeal€No.Ìà àà à)à à01„A„01„9602„CV„00070Ìv.à àà à)Ìà àà à)à àDavidson€CircuitÌMARY€ANN€CRAWFORD€andà à)à àNo.€94C„2407ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€&)%;+'h|y:` ç `€€Lß›RONALD€SHANE€CRAWFORD,à à)Ìà àà à)Ìà àRespondents/Appellants.à à)ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÔ€"¼ÔCOURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CIRCUIT€COURT€FOR€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌÌAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÌÌTHE€HONORABLE€THOMAS€W.€BROTHERS,€JUDGEÌÓ ` Ü‚XœÈ“X ÓÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌÔ€"XÔWAYNE€DETRINGÌ103€Hazel€Path€CourtÌHendersonville,€Tennessee€€37075Ìà àATTORNEY€FOR€PETITIONER/APPELLEEÌÌÌÌJOHN€L.€SCHLECHTYÌ222€Second€Avenue€NorthÌSuite€360MÌNashville,€Tennessee€€37201Ìà àœATTORNEY›€FOR€RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTSÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÔ€"¼ÔSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÓ  ÓÓÓòòÔ€"°ÔOÔ€"¼Ô€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÓ  ÓÓ#` Ü` ä œÈ“X#ÓóóÔ€"XÔà àIn€this€appeal€respondents,€Mary€Ann€Crawford€and€Ronald€ShaneÏCrawford,€question€the€trial€judge's€œdecision€to€deny€Mary€Ann€Crawford'sÏmotion€to€dismiss€the€petition€of€petitioner,€Thomas€Matthew€Cihlar,€toÏ"legitimate"€Mary€Ann€Crawford's€biological€child.ÌÌà àIn€July€1988,€Mary€Ann€Crawford€and€Ronald€Shane€CrawfordÏmarried.€€Sean€Michael€Crawford€was€born€on€29€November€1991€in€Nashville,ÏTennessee.€€Respondents€have€remained€married€since€July€1988.€€PetitionerÏclaimed€that€respondents€separated€in€December€1990€and€that€he€and€MaryÏAnn€Crawford€had€an€affair€during€this€time.€€It€is€also€petitioner'sÏcontention€that€Mary€Ann€Crawford€became€pregnant€as€a€result€of€theÏaffair€and€that€Sean€Michael€Crawford€is€his€child.€€€ÌÌà àPetitioner€filed€his€"Petition€for€Legitimation"€on€26€July€1994.€ÏHe€sought€to€"legitimate"€Sean€Michael€Crawford€and€named€Mary€AnnÏCrawford€and€Randall€Shane€Crawford€as€respondents.€€After€respondentsÍanswered€the€petition,€the€court€entered€an€agreed€order€in€December€1994.€ÏThe€agreed€order€€granted€petitioner's€petition,€established€a€visitationÏschedule,€and€fixed€the€amount€of€child€support.ÌÌà àIn€January€1995,€respondents€moved€to€vacate€the€agreed€orderÏpursuant€to€Tennessee€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€60.02.€€In€February€1995,Ïthe€trial€court€entered€an€order€vacating€the€agreed€order€except€for€theÏprovisions€relating€to€visitation.€€The€court€ordered€respondents€toÏreimburse€all€child€support€paid€by€petitioner€and€to€pay€petitioner'sÏattorney's€fees€of€$1,562.50€incurred€in€connection€with€the€agreed€orderÏand€the€motion€to€set€it€aside.ÌÌà àIn€March€1995,€respondents€filed€a€motion€to€dismiss.€€PetitionerÏopposed€the€motion€and€gave€notice€to€the€Tennessee€State€Attorney€GeneralÏthat€he€intended€to€challenge€the€constitutionality€of€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€section€36„2„202.× ƒ+ ××  ×ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€entered€an€order€in€May€1995.€€It€found€thatÏTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€36„2„202€was€"not€unconstitutional€on€itsÏface€under€either€the€United€States€or€Tennessee€Constitutions"€andÏdismissed€the€constitutional€challenge.€€The€trial€court€reserved€decisionÏon€the€motion€to€dismiss€until€after€an€evidentiary€hearing€in€May€1995.€ÏAt€the€conclusion€of€the€evidentiary€hearing,€the€trial€court€found€inÏpart€as€follows:€€ÌÓÓà8 à€€It€would€be€a€mockery€to€the€concept€of€marriage€toÏdescribe€the€erratic€relationship€of€Mr.€and€Mrs.ÏCrawford€as€being€"lawful€wedlock".€.€.€.€€ÌÌà8 à€€.€.€.€.€ÌÌà8 à€€It€is€the€opinion€of€this€Court€that€Mr.€Cihlar€is€notÏprohibited€from€filing€a€petition€for€the€legitimation€ofÏSean€Michael€Crawford€under€the€unique€facts€of€thisÏcase.€€ÌÌÓÓIn€July€1995€the€trial€court€entered€an€order€denying€the€respondents'Ïmotion€to€dismiss€and€granted€the€petition€for€legitimation.€€RespondentsÏfiled€a€timely€notice€of€appeal€and€presented€the€following€issues:ÌÓ&` Ü` ä <œÈ“X&ÓÓÓà8 àà àWhere€the€mother€of€a€child€was€married€at€the€timeÏsaid€child€was€born€and€at€the€time€a€Petition€toÏð ðlegitimateðð€said€child€was€filed€and€the€trial€courtÏfound€that€Tennessee's€legitimation€statute€is€notÏunconstitutional:ÌÌÓ&` Ü` ä ‚XœÈ“X&Óà8 àà à1.à àDid€the€trial€court€err€in€denying€theÏmother's€Motion€to€Dismiss€said€Petition;€and€ÌÌà8 àà à2.à àDid€the€trial€court€err€in€entering€judgmentÏin€favor€of€the€Petitioner€without€the€mother's€consentÏthereby€ð ðlegitimatingðð€a€child€born€to€a€married€woman?ÌÌÓÓÌà àProceedings€to€legitimate€children€were€unknown€at€common€law€andÏare€exclusively€a€creature€of€the€legislature.€€ò òòòCunningham€v.€Goldenó óóó,Ï652€S.W.2d€910,€911€(Tenn.€App.€1983).€€Since€the€legitimation€statute€isÏin€derogation€of€the€common€law,€it€must€be€strictly€construed.€€ò òòòTaylorÏv.€Tayloró óóó,€40€S.W.2d€393,€395€(Tenn.€1931).€€In€the€absence€of€TennesseeÏCode€Annotated€section€36„2„202,€Tennessee's€courts€lack€jurisdiction€toÏconsider€legitimation€cases.€€Therefore,€if€legitimation€is€to€be€done€atÏall,€it€must€be€done€in€accordance€with€the€statute.ÌÌà àWhen€considering€the€phrase€"child€not€born€in€lawful€wedlock"€asÏused€in€the€statute,€this€court€observed€"we€are€persuaded€that€in€1805,Ïor€for€that€matter€in€1955,€when€the€statute€was€codified,€the€LegislatureÏintended€to€make€it€applicable€only€to€children€of€unmarried€women€.€.€.Ï."€€ò òòòCunninghamó óóó,€652€S.W.2d€910,€912„13.€€In€a€recent€opinion€written€byÏJudge€Cantrell,€this€court€applied€the€reasoning€of€òòò òCunninghamóóó ó.€€òòò òEvansÏv.€Steelmanóóó ó,€No.€01„A„01„9511„JV„00508€(Tenn.€App.€2€October€1996).€ÏExcept€for€one€issue,€which€we€address€later,€the€facts€of€òòò òEvansó óóó€and€theÏpresent€case€are€similar.€€Thus,€we€adopt€the€following€quoted€portion€ofÏJudge€Cantrell's€opinion.€€ÌÓÓà8 àà àIn€ò òòòCunningham€v.€Goldenó óóó,€652€S.W.2d€910€(Tenn.ÏApp.€1983),€this€court€interpreted€the€phrase,€"child€notÏborn€in€lawful€wedlock,"€in€section(a),€the€only€sectionÏthat€existed€at€the€time,€€to€mean€a€child€born€to€anÏunmarried€woman.€€In€ò òòòCooper€v.€Thompsonó óóó,€710€S.W.2dÏ944€(Tenn.€App.€1985),€this€court€followed€the€ruling€inÏò òòòCunninghamó óóó€and€said,€"The€legitimation€statutes€are€forÏthe€protection€of€the€child,€and€are€not€for€the€purposeÏof€allowing€parents,€biological€or€otherwise,€to€stakeÏout€claims€to€the€child."€€710€S.W.2d€at€946.€€In€bothÏopinions€the€members€of€the€court€expressed€a€strongÍbelief€that€a€restrictive€interpretation€was€necessary€toÏpreserve€the€integrity€of€existing€families.ÌÌà àà à.€.€.€.ÌÌà8 àà à.€.€.€"[T]he€legislature€is€presumed€to€know€theÏinterpretation€which€courts€make€of€its€enactments."€Ïò òòòHamby€v.€McDanieló óóó,€559€S.W.2d€774€(Tenn.€1974).€€Thus,Ïwhen€the€legislature€amended€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„2„202Ïin€1992,€and€again€in€1994,€it€presumably€knew€of€theÏinterpretation€given€the€statute€in€ò òòòCunningham€óóó óandò òòòÏCooperó óóó.€€Nevertheless,€it€did€not€change€the€language€ofÏthe€statute,€and€the€additional€sections€keep€its€scopeÏvery€narrow.€€Subsection€(b)€provides€an€informalÏprocedure€for€obtaining€an€order€of€legitimation€of€aÏchild€born€to€an€òòunmarriedóó€woman,€and,€as€if€toÏunderscore€the€restrictions€placed€on€putative€fathers,Ïsubsection€(c)€makes€the€mother's€consent€a€requirementÏin€any€legitimation€proceeding.€€We€are€persuaded,Ïtherefore,€that€the€legislature€intended€to€restrict€theÏoperation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„2„202€to€casesÏinvolving€children€born€to€unmarried€mothers.ÌÌà àà à.€.€.€.ÌÌÓ  Óa.€€Due€ProcessÌÌÓ  Óà8 àà àThe€Fourteenth€Amendment€to€the€federalÏconstitution€and€Article€1€ðð€6€of€the€state€constitutionÏprohibit€the€state€from€taking€a€citizen's€life,€liberty,Ïor€property€without€due€process€of€law.€€The€parent„childÏrelationship€may€rise€to€the€level€of€a€protectiveÏinterest,€because€it€is€viewed€as€an€interest€in€liberty.€Ïò òòòLehr€v.€Robertsonó óóó,€463€U.S.€248,€103€S.Ct.€2985,€77ÏL.Ed.2d€614€(1983);€ò òòòNale€v.€Robertsonó óóó,€871€S.W.2d€674Ï(Tenn.€1994).€€The€right€to€raise€a€child€is€also€a€rightÏof€privacy€guaranteed€by€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€Ïò òòòHawk€v.€Hawkó óóó,€855€S.W.2d€573€(Tenn.€1993).€€ButÏconstitutional€protection€does€not€result€from€the€"mereÏexistence€of€a€biological€link;"€an€unwed€father€mustÏdemonstrate€a€"full€commitment€to€the€responsibilities€ofÏparenthood"€before€"his€interest€and€personal€contactÏwith€his€child€acquires€substantial€protection€under€theÏDue€Process€clause."€€ò òòòLehr€v.€Robertsonó óóó,€463€U.S.€atÏ261,€103€S.Ct.€at€2993,€77€L.Ed.2d€at€626.ÌÌà8 àà àWhether€[petitioner's]€interest€has€risen€to€theÏlevel€where€it€acquires€constitutional€protection€has€notÏbeen€determined.€€For€the€purpose€of€this€argument,€weÏassume€that€it€has.€€Nevertheless,€the€short€answer€toÏthe€due€process€argument€is€that€the€statute€does€notÍdeprive€him€of€anything.€€At€common€law,€he€had€no€rightÏto€legitimate€the€child,€and€this€state€has€neverÏrecognized€that€right€except€by€the€statute€in€question.€ÏThe€statute€creates€rights€rather€than€taking€them€away,Ïand€should€not€be€judged€defective€on€due€processÏgrounds.€€We€think€[petitioner's]€case€boils€down€to€aÏquestion€of€whether€his€rights€to€equal€protection€haveÏbeen€violated€by€the€state€giving€the€right€to€legitimateÏa€child€to€a€man€who€fathers€a€child€by€an€unmarriedÏwoman€while€denying€that€right€to€men€whose€children€areÏthe€product€of€a€liason€with€another€man's€wife.ÌÌÓ  Ób.€Equal€ProtectionÌÌÓ  Óà8 àà àThe€right€to€equal€protection€under€the€law,€asÏpreserved€by€both€state€and€federal€constitutions,Ïguarantees€"equal€privileges€and€immunities€for€all€thoseÏsimilarly€situated."€€ò òòòTennessee€Small€Schools€v.ÏMcWherteró óóó,€851€S.W.2d€139,€152€(Tenn.€1993).€€TheÏobverse€of€that€proposition€is€a€recognition€that€Ï"things€which€are€different€in€fact€or€opinion€are€notÏrequired€by€either€constitution€to€be€treated€the€same."€Ïò òòòId.ó óóó€851€S.W.2d€at€153.€€ò òòòSee€also€MCIÏTelecommunications€Corp.€v.€Tayloró óóó,€914€S.W.2d€519Ï(Tenn.€App.€1995).€€ÌÌà8 àà àIn€a€case€brought€as€a€paternity€action€pursuant€toÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€36„2„103€(but€treated€by€the€Court€ofÏAppeals€as€a€legitimate€action)€this€court€held€thatÏwhere€the€child€was€born€during€the€mother's€marriage€toÏanother€man€the€state's€interest€in€preserving€familyÏstability€overrode€any€constitutionally€cognizableÏinterest€of€the€putative€father.€€òòò òIn€the€Matter€ofóóÏ"A"ó ó,€735€S.W.2d€232€(Tenn.€App.€1987).€€The€court€quotedÏwith€approval€from€ò òòòPetitioner€F.€v.€Respondent€R.,ó óóóÏ430€A.2d€1075€(Del.€1981):ÌÌòòò òà8 àà8 àó óóó[I]n€this€case,€however,€there€exists€theÏvery€powerful€countervailing€public€interestÏin€promoting€the€marital€relationship,Ïpreserving€intact€an€existing€family€unit,Ïand€protecting€the€minor€child€fromÏconfusion,€torn€affection,€and€the€lifelongÏstigma€of€illegitimacy.€€Thus,€even€assumingÏòòarguendoóó€that€the€putative€father€has€aÏconstitutionally€cognizable€interest,€thatÏinterest€would€be€outweighed€by€the€competingÏpublic€interest€and€public€policy€in€thisÏcase,€and€he€must€be€denied€judicial€access.ÌÌà à735€S.W.2d€at€238,€430€A.2d€at€1079.ÌÌÌÌòòò òà8 àà àIn€Matter€of€óó"A",ó ó€this€court€also€rejected€theÏputative€father's€argument€that€the€paternity€statuteÏviolated€his€right€to€equal€protection€by€giving€theÏright€to€file€a€petition€to€the€mother€and€not€to€him.€ÏWe€found€that€the€putative€father€was€not€in€the€sameÏcategory€or€€circumstances€as€those€within€the€family.€ÏWe€think€that€a€person€seeking€to€legitimate€a€child€bornÏto€a€married€woman€is€also€in€a€fundamentally€differentÏposition€from€a€man€seeking€to€legitimate€a€child€born€toÏan€unmarried€woman.€€The€state's€interest€in€preservingÏthe€family€justifies€the€state's€decision€to€give€theÏright€of€legitimation€to€one€and€not€the€other.ÌÌò òòòEvans€v.€Steelmanó óóó,€No.€01„A„01„9511„JV„00508,€slip€op.€at€3„7ÌÌ(Tenn.€App.€2€October€1996)(footnotes€omitted).ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àIt€is€undisputed€that€Mary€Ann€Crawford€is€the€mother€of€SeanÏMichael€Crawford.€€She€wasÏmarried ried€at€the€time€of€Sean€Michael€Crawford's€birth,€their€marriage€was€inÏsuch€a€state€that€there€was€no€public€policy€reason€for€protecting€it.€€InÏother€words,€the€trial€court€determined€that€the€child€was€not€born€inÏlawful€wedlock€because€respondents'€marriage€was€a€mockery.€€Based€on€thisÏfinding,€the€court€allowed€petitioner's€case€to€proceed.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€has,€in€effect,€amended€the€statute€by€statingÏthat€under€facts€such€as€we€have€in€this€case€petitioner€would€have€aÏright€to€bring€a€legitimation€action.€€Neither€this€court€nor€the€trialÏcourt€has€the€authority€to€amend€acts€of€the€General€Assembly.€€ÌÌà àTherefore,€it€follows€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€isÏreversed€with€costs€on€appeal€assessed€to€petitioner,€Thomas€MathewÏCihlar.€€The€cause€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€further€necessaryÏproceedings.€€Ìà àÌÓÓà àà àà àà à__________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGEÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌHENRY€F.€TODD,€P.J.,€M.S.ÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌBEN€H.€CANTRELL,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ