Hayes v. Dixon
| Decision Date | 07 October 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 8618SC254,8618SC254 |
| Citation | 348 S.E.2d 609,83 N.C.App. 52 |
| Parties | Zelma E. HAYES v. Joyce M. DIXON, Administratrix of the Estate of Kyrl Houston Jeffries, Novella J. Martin, Samuel Jeffries and Joyce M. Dixon, Administratrix of the Estate of Myrtle Jeffries. |
| Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
Levitt and Gordon by Dean L. Gordon, New Hartford, and Faison, Brown, Fletcher, Shearon & Brough by Reginald B. Gillespie Jr., Durham, for plaintiff-appellant.
Street, Welborn & Stokes by Marquis D. Street, Greensboro, for defendants-appellees.
Plaintiff contends that it was error for the trial court to apply G.S. 29-19(b) in this matter where the biological father-daughter relationship between decedent and plaintiff is not a genuine issue. We do not agree.
G.S. 29-19(b) in pertinent part states:
For purposes of intestate succession, an illegitimate child shall be entitled to take by, through and from:
(1) Any person who has been finally adjudged to be the father of such child pursuant to the provisions of G.S. 49-1 through 49-9 or the provisions of G.S. 49-14 through 49-16;
(2) Any person who has acknowledged himself during his own lifetime and the child's lifetime to be the father of such child in a written instrument executed or acknowledged before a certifying officer named in G.S. 52-10(b) and filed during his own lifetime and the child's lifetime in the office of the clerk of superior court of the county where either he or the child resides.
Absent the statute, an illegitimate child has no right to inherit from his or her putative father. See Herndon v. Robinson, 57 N.C.App. 318, 291 S.E.2d 305, appeal dismissed and cert. denied, 306 N.C. 557, 294 S.E.2d 223 (1982). In the present case, there has been no compliance with G.S. 29-19. Therefore plaintiff has no right to inherit from decedent.
The statute mandates that at times may create a harsh result. It is not, however, for the courts but rather for the legislature to effect any change. We find no error in the application of G.S. 29-19 in this case.
Plaintiff also argues that the decedent's actions during his life constituted constructive compliance with G.S. 29-19. We disagree.
Although we are aware of cases commenting upon constructive compliance, the doctrine has not been specifically recognized in North Carolina. However, even if the doctrine were to exist, decedent's acts in this case would not rise to the level of constructive compliance with G.S. 29-19.
Plaintiff further contends "that the plaintiff-appellant may be the 'legitimated child' under the laws of the state of New York within the meaning of G.S. 29-18 and therefore entitled to inherit from decedent." We disagree.
G.S. 29-18 states:
A child born an illegitimate who shall have been legitimated in accordance with G.S. 49-10 or 49-12 or in accordance with the applicable...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Estate of Williams
...exact requirements of the statute leaves the child in an illegitimate status for intestate succession purposes. Hayes v. Dixon, 83 N.C.App. 52, 54–55, 348 S.E.2d 609–610 (1986). This Court recognizes "an illegitimate child's right to inherit from her putative father is established only via ......
- Fuhs v. Fuhs, COA15–945.
-
In re Moore
...she has no legal right to take from her putative father through intestate succession. See id.; see also Hayes v. Dixon , 83 N.C. App. 52, 54, 348 S.E.2d 609, 610 (1986). ¶ 13 In this case, McDougald alleged in her caveat that she is "the biological daughter of the Decedent and the only biol......
-
Helms v. Young-Woodard
...Absent a statute to the contrary, illegitimate children have no right to inherit from their putative fathers. Hayes v. Dixon, 83 N.C.App. 52, 348 S.E.2d 609 (1986), disc. rev. denied, 319 N.C. 224, 353 S.E.2d 402 (1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 824, 108 S.Ct. 88, 98 L.Ed.2d 50 (1987). There ......