legal heirs

[bloodkin]

just a quick question about legal heirs: if a child is not biologically related, but was placed within family by having a family member's name listed as "father" on birth certificate, is that child an equal family heir, or not? not as a child of the "father" but in the larger family sense (legal heir of his brothers, sisters, etc)
thanks

 

[lwpat]

A little confused about your question. If the person admitted paternity and his name was placed on the birth certificate, then it is his child as far as the courts are concerned. An action would have to be brought to "de-establish" paternity.

This would only come into play under intestacy.

 

[seniorjudge]

just a quick question about legal heirs: if a child is not biologically related, but was placed within family by having a family member's name listed as "father" on birth certificate, is that child an equal family heir, or not? not as a child of the "father" but in the larger family sense (legal heir of his brothers, sisters, etc)
thanks

Who died?

You do not have heirs until someone dies.

 

[bloodkin]

Thank you both for responding. During the interim, I researched it as far as possible, and determined that in my state, they are indeed legal, blood or no blood; as corresponds to lpat's reply. The last of several brothers died intestate, and the only remaining kin are all his nieces and nephews, 2 of which were sired by men outside the family, but his brothers were both married to the expectant mothers at birth, and did raise them as true children, along with subsequent children the couples had together. Their relationship to the "one who died" was as nieces.

Thank you again for your help! Much appreciated,

bloodkin