In re S.A.H. — Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed biological father’s parentage adjudication

Case
The People of the State of Colorado, Petitioner, In the Interest of S.A.H. and D.A.H., Children, and Concerning H.C.H. and E.A.M. a/k/a E.A.H., Appellants
Court
Colorado Court of Appeals
Judge
Chief Judge Tow; Judge Harris; Judge Brown
Date Decided
August 20, 2026
Docket No.
25CA2369
Topics
Parentage, Dependency and Neglect, Appellate Jurisdiction, Child’s Best Interests
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

After twins S.A.H. and D.A.H. were born, the Denver Department of Human Services took temporary custody and initiated a dependency-and-neglect proceeding. H.C.H. is the children’s mother. E.A.M. a/k/a E.A.H., the psychological father, accompanied her to the hospital, regarded the children as his own, and claimed a parentage presumption based on holding them out as his children. Genetic testing showed that he was not a genetic parent.

A.S., the biological father, claimed a competing presumption based on genetic testing. At the parentage hearing, the mother and guardian ad litem supported the psychological father. The juvenile court afforded both men presumptions but concluded that the biological father’s presumption controlled and adjudicated A.S. the children’s legal father. The mother and psychological father appealed.

The Court’s Holding

The Court of Appeals first held that the parentage order was final and appealable even though the dependency-and-neglect case remained pending. The requested parentage hearing commenced a discrete proceeding governed by the Uniform Parentage Act, and the resulting order fully resolved the children’s parentage. Because the psychological father filed a timely appeal that placed the merits before the court, the division declined to decide whether the mother independently had standing to appeal.

On the merits, the division held that the juvenile court did not abuse its discretion in selecting the biological father’s presumption. The juvenile court treated the competing presumptions as equal, considered the statutory factors and the children’s best interests, and reasonably found that placement with the biological father offered a greater possibility of returning the children to a parent. Although evidence favored the psychological father in some respects, the appellate court would not reweigh it. The order was affirmed.

Key Takeaways

  • A parentage order resolving all competing parentage claims within an ongoing dependency-and-neglect case is final and appealable because it terminates a discrete embedded proceeding.
  • A genetic parentage presumption does not automatically outweigh a holding-out presumption; the juvenile court must consider the pertinent statutory factors and focus on the child’s best interests.
  • An appellate court reviewing the selection between competing parentage presumptions defers to supported factual findings and will not reweigh evidence when the juvenile court chose from a range of reasonable options.

Why It Matters

The opinion clarifies the route for immediate appellate review of Colorado parentage determinations made during dependency-and-neglect litigation. Parties need not wait for the entire child-welfare case to conclude when the juvenile court has fully resolved the separate parentage dispute.

It also reinforces that biology is not dispositive under Colorado’s Uniform Parentage Act. Courts must weigh competing presumptions through a fact-specific, best-interests analysis, although a supported determination will receive substantial appellate deference.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top