California law provides that when a person dies without a will or a trust (a situation known as intestacy), their assets will pass to their closest family members — usually their surviving spouse and/or children. Establishing a parental relationship is therefore a critical step in a child confirming they are an heir of a deceased person’s intestate estate.
Most of the time, this is an uncontroversial process, as legal parentage generally is established at the time of a child’s birth or by legal adoption. However, legal parentage can also be established by conduct and intention, without formal legal adoption or a biological relationship.
The appellate court’s opinion in the recent case Estate of Martino (2023) 96 Cal.App.5th 596 demonstrates that for the purpose of intestate succession, a “natural parent” does not have to be a biological parent, but instead can be a stepparent or other adult who raised a child and held that child out as their own.
Who Counts as a “Natural Parent” for the Purpose of Intestate Succession Under California Law?
Under the California Probate Code, natural parents, adoptive parents, foster parents and stepparents can all be considered as parents for purposes of intestate succession, depending on the circumstances.
The definition of “natural parent” is more expansive than one might think. California law provides that a “natural parent” is a nonadoptive parent, who may or may not be biologically related to the child. The most common situations where a person is presumed to be a natural parent under the law are when the presumed parent is married to the child’s mother and the child is born during marriage, and when the presumed parent receives the child into their home and openly holds out the child as their natural child.
A person inherits through their natural parents and adoptive parents. A person may also inherit through stepparents or foster parents via statutory adoption if the relationship began when the person was a child and continued through their joint lifetimes, and if the person establishes by clear and convincing evidence that they would have been legally adopted by the stepparent or foster parent if not for a legal barrier, such as a child’s biological parent(s) not consenting the adoption, which is required for the adoption to be formalized. Finally, a person may inherit through the doctrine of equitable adoption, which requires proof that the person filled the place of a natural child to the potential parent, the potential parent intended to adopt the child but did not because of inadvertence or fault, and that the relationship between the two persisted throughout their joint lifetimes.
But can a stepparent, foster parent or other nonadoptive, nonbiological parent count as a “natural parent”? Are stepchildren, foster children and other nonadoptive, nonbiological children required to meet the requirements of Probate Code sections 6454 or 6455 to inherit from a potential parent?
In Depth Look into Estate of Martino: Can a Stepchild Inherit From a Stepparent’s Intestate Estate?
In Martino, the probate court determined that a parent child relationship existed between the decedent, Nick Martino (“Decedent”), and his stepson, Nick Zambito (“Zambito”), because Decedent was Zambito’s “natural parent” pursuant to Probate Code section 6453.
Decedent married Zambito’s mother when Zambito was five years old, and they divorced when Zambito was 11. Still, Decedent and Zambito developed a close relationship, and Zambito saw Decedent as his true father while they lived together during Decedent’s marriage to Zambito’s mother.
Zambito and Decedent maintained this close relationship in Zambito’s adulthood, with Zambito visiting Decedent often in his later years and accompanying Decedent to medical appointments after Decedent became ill. Decedent’s close friends said that Decedent referred to Zambito as his son.
Zambito Cites Probate Code Section 6453 to Prove Decedent Is His “Natural Parent”
After Decedent’s death, Zambito filed a petition pursuant to Probate Code section 11700 to determine his entitlement to share in Decedent’s estate as an intestate heir.
Zambito’s petition was opposed by Decedent’s other children. Zambito initially sought to prove his heirship as Decedent’s stepchild through Probate Code section 6454. Zambito, however, conceded that no legal barrier to adoption for him existed when Decedent died in 2004, meaning Probate Code section 6454 was inapplicable.
Zambito also pursued intestate heirship under the theory that Decedent had equitably adopted him pursuant to Probate Code section 6455 this theory was unsuccessful at trial, as Zambito failed to prove Decedent’s intent to adopt him.
But it was his final argument, added in an amended petition, that won out at trial: that Decedent was Zambito’s “natural parent” within the meaning of Probate Code section 6453.
Appellate Court Reaffirms Biological Relations Aren’t Necessary to Establish Legal Parentage
Decedent’s other children argued on appeal that Zambito had no standing to argue that Decedent was his “natural parent” because Decedent and Zambito were not biologically related. The appellate court rejected this argument, analyzing numerous appellate decisions made in the family law context, which determined that stepparents and other non biological parents could qualify as “natural parents” pursuant to Family Code section 7611(d), if they hold the child out as their natural child and receive the child into their home.
The appellate court reasoned that, “[o]ther California courts have similarly found that a man ‘with no biological connection to the child, no marital connection to the mother, and no way to satisfy the statutory presumption of paternity may nevertheless be deemed a presumed father’ under Family Code section 7611, subdivision (d), if he can prove ‘an existing familial relationship with the child,’ a bond the likes of which ‘should not be lightly dissolved.’”
The appellate court, likewise, rejected the other children’s argument that Zambito was required to pursue intestate heirship under Probate Code section 6454 because that statute should be considered the exclusive method for a stepchild to assert heirship through a stepparent.
Appellate Court Finds That Proving Parentage for a Stepchild Is Possible Under Probate Code Sections 6453 and 6454
The appellate court harmonized Probate Code sections 6453 and 6454 and found that they both offered different ways of proving parentage for a stepchild, meaning that a stepchild does not have to pick one statute over the other to establish a parental relationship. More specifically, each statute can apply in situations where the other statute cannot.
H4: Appellate Court Rules That Zambito Can Inherit From Both His Biological Father’s and Presumed Father’s Estates
Finally, the appellate court rejected the other children’s argument that, since Zambito previously inherited through his biological father in a Nevada probate proceeding, he should be judicially estopped (in other words, barred from relief based on his past behavior) from also inheriting from Decedent because he has essentially already “chosen” who his real parent is.
The appellate court determined that judicial estoppel did not apply because Zambito’s assertion that Decedent was his “natural parent” was not inconsistent with asserting that he was entitled to inherit from his biological father under his biological father’s will.
The appellate court cited Family Code section 7601, which recognizes that a person can have a parent child relationship with more than two parents. The appellate court, therefore, upheld the trial court’s ruling that Decedent qualifies as Zambito’s “natural parent” under California law, and that Zambito is therefore entitled to inherit from Decedent’s intestate estate.
Key Takeaways: Biology Isn’t the Only Way to Establish a Parental Relationship
As for the question of how to determine parentage, the Martino decision demonstrates that establishing legal parentage is not as simple as looking to a biological relationship or formal recognition through adoption, birth certificates or genetic testing. Parentage can be developed through a relationship between the potential parent and the child, so long as the presumed parent accepts the child into their home and holds out the child as their natural child.
Though the facts demonstrated that the close connection between Zambito and Decedent supported a finding that Decedent was Zambito’s “natural parent,” the Martino decision has far reaching implications for determining who qualifies as intestate heirs for deceased persons.
If someone dies intestate, the circumstances of the deceased person’s relationship with any stepchildren, foster children or even children of former romantic partners should be carefully analyzed in determining if any such children can inherit from the deceased person’s estate.
Have further questions about intestate succession or the inheritance rights of stepchildren? We’re here to help.
Blended families are increasingly common in modern times, but the legal challenges they present can be complex and are not always straightforward. The law may fail to provide clear
cut answers for these unique situations.
Fortunately, our firm specializes exclusively in probate law. Our attorneys are well versed in the latest developments and can provide expert guidance tailored to your needs.
Call us today to request a free consultation with one of our attorneys.
