AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• David Swift, the putative father of a child, committed suicide six months before the child's birth. Ricky Swift, David's father and the personal representative of his estate, sought to adjudicate the child's paternity and filed a petition for genetic testing. The mother of the child, Nicole Bullington, contested the petition, leading to legal proceedings to determine the standing of a personal representative in a paternity action under the New Mexico Uniform Parentage Act (UPA) (paras 3-4).

Procedural History

• District Court of Valencia County: Dismissed the paternity action filed by Ricky Swift, the personal representative of David Swift's estate, on the grounds that a personal representative lacks standing under the UPA to bring an action to adjudicate paternity. Additionally, dismissed a separate action for grandparent visitation privileges brought by Ricky Swift and Mary Swift (paras 1, 3-5).

Parties' Submissions

• Petitioner-Appellant (Ricky Swift, Personal Representative): Argued that as the personal representative of the decedent's estate, he has standing under Section 40-11A-602(F) of the UPA to bring an action to adjudicate parentage. Asserted that the paternity action should not be dismissed due to the death of the putative father and sought genetic testing to clarify paternity (paras 3, 7-8).
• Respondent-Appellee (Nicole Bullington): Contended that the personal representative lacks standing to maintain a paternity proceeding under the UPA and the New Mexico Uniform Probate Code. Argued that a cause of action to establish paternity does not survive the death of the putative father (para 4).

Legal Issues

• Whether a personal representative of a decedent’s estate has standing to bring an action for an adjudication of parentage under the New Mexico Uniform Parentage Act (UPA) (para 2).
• Whether a paternity action survives the death of the putative father (para 11).

Disposition

• The Court of Appeals of New Mexico reversed the district court's dismissal of both the paternity action and the grandparent visitation action, holding that a personal representative does have standing under the UPA to bring an action to adjudicate parentage (paras 2, 15-17).

Reasons

• The Court, per Judge Linda M. Vanzi, with Chief Judge Roderick T. Kennedy and Judge Michael D. Bustamante concurring, found that:
  A personal representative is considered a "representative authorized by law" to act on behalf of a deceased individual under Section 40-11A-602(F) of the UPA, thus having standing to bring a paternity action (paras 9-10).
  The UPA and related statutes contemplate that a parentage action can be maintained after the death of a putative father, as evidenced by provisions regarding standing, venue, and statute of limitations (paras 12-13).
  Previous case law and the legislative intent behind the UPA support the conclusion that a paternity action does not abate upon the death of the putative father, and a personal representative has the standing to initiate such action posthumously (paras 13-14).