S.C.V

L.D.V., the mother of S.C.V.,1 sued J.Y.W. under Chapter 13 of the Family Code to establish paternity. At the time of birth and at the possible time of conception, L.D.V. was married to J.L.V.2 She alleged, however, that J.Y.W. is the biological father of her child. In response to a single special issue, the jury found that J.Y.W. is the natural father of S.C.V. Although J.Y.W. requested an issue on non-access, the court denied his request. J.Y.W. contends that the evidence is legally and factually insufficient to rebut the statutory presumption that S.C.V. is the legitimate child of J.L.V., the husband of L.D.V. We agree that there is no evidence rebutting this threshold presumption; accordingly, we reverse and render. A child born or conceived during a lawful marriage is presumed to be the legitimate child of the husband. Tex. Fam. Code Ann. ? 12.02(a) (Vernon 1986); Clark v. Clark, 643 S.W.2d 795, 797 (Tex. App. -- Fort Worth 1982, no writ); Joplin v. Meadows, 623 S.W.2d 442, 443 (Tex. App. -- Texarkana 1981, no writ). This presumption is one of the strongest known to the law and can be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence showing non-access by or impotency of the husband.3 D.W.L. v. M.J.B.C., 601 S.W.2d 475, 477 (Tex. Civ. App. -- Houston [14th Dist.] 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Wedgman v. Wedqman, 541 S.W.2d 522, 523 (Tex. Civ. App. -- Waco 1976, writ dism'd). The burden rests upon the mother to rebut the presumption. See D.W.L. v. M.J.B.C., 601 S.W.2d at 477. The question of paternity is never reached until and unless the presumption of legitimacy is rebutted.