Birth certificates are generally governed by statutes which specifically provide that certified copies of such certificates are self-authenticating and constitute prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein.{footnote}Hilliard v. United States, 121 F.2d 992 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 314 U.S. 627 (1941) (proof of age).
Ark. Stat. Ann. § 20-18-305 (1995); Cal Health & Saf. Code § 103550 (1996); Off. C. Ga. Ann. § 31-10-26 (1996); 410 ILCS 535/25 (1996); Mich. Stat. Ann. § 14.15(2886) (1996); N.Y. Cons. L. Svc. Pub. Health § 4103 (1997); 24 Laws P.R. Ann. § 1237 (1992); Va. Code Ann. § 32.1-272 (1997); Barnes v. Rebsamen Motors, Inc., 255 S.W.2d 961 (Ark. 1953) (prima facie evidence of age; applying prior law); Murr v. Murr, 87 Cal App 2d 511, 197 P2d __ (Cal. App. 1948) (pregnancy duration); Cunningham v. State, 68 S.E.2d 614 (Ga. App. 1952) (admissible to prove witness’ age; applying prior law); Ashford v. Ziemann, 459 N.E.2d 940, 945 (Ill. 1984) (statute renders certificate prima facie evidence of only the name, sex, date and place of birth of the child); People v Smith, 227 N.W.2d 233 (Mich. App. 1975); People v. Brown, 66 A.D.2d 223, 413 N.Y.S.2d 482 (1979) (birth registration admissible to corroborate rape victim’s age).
But see In re Meyer’s Estate, 206 Misc. 368, 132 N.Y.S.2d 825 (1954); In re Billings’ Estate, 196 Misc. 141, 91 N.Y.S.2d 665 (1949) (birth certificate admissible to prove birth, but not parentage).{/footnote}  Birth certificates are often also deemed admissible under an exception to the hearsay rule.{footnote}FRE 803(9) (records of vital statistics).
Lewis v. Petty, 613 S.W.2d 585, 586 (Ark. 1981) (citing Ark. R. Evid. 803(9)); Ashford v. Ziemann, 459 N.E.2d 940, 945 (Ill. 1984) (admissible as mother’s consistent statement as to identity of father).

But see People ex rel. Moran v. Teolis, 326 N.E.2d 232 (Ill. App. 1960) (not admissible to show mother’s place of residence).{/footnote}  The statements in a birth certificate are not conclusive, and may be rebutted by other evidence.{footnote}Binion v. Chater, 108 F.3d 780, 787 (7th Cir. 1997).
Estate of Marshall, 262 P.2d 42 (Cal. App. 1953), disapproved on other grounds, Kusior v. Silver, 354 P.2d 657 (1960); Cunningham v. State, 68 S.E.2d 614 (Ga. App. 1952) (state entitled to disprove statement on certificate as to race of child’s parents; applying prior law); Lewis v. Lewis, 85 Misc 2d 610, 381 N.Y.S.2d 631 (1976) (presumption of accuracy successfully rebutted by evidence that husband named as father on birth cirtificate was not in fact father of child); Juan Bigas v. Industrial Comm’n, 71 P.R.R. 313 (1950).{/footnote}

A birth certificate with no name for the father may be admitted in a paternity case to show that a child was born out of wedlock.{footnote}Binion v. Chater, 108 F.3d 780, 787 (7th Cir. 1997).
Kelly v. Pasko, 540 N.E.2d 462 (Ill. App. 1989).{/footnote}
Birth certificates have been held not to be admissible within the hearsay  exceptions for public records and records of vital statistics.{footnote}CHECK Ashford v. Ziemann, 459 N.E.2d 940 (Ill. 1984).{/footnote}