Wehsener v. Jernigan

Holding

The court held that California’s intestate‑succession statutes, including Probate Code §§ 6450‑6455 and the Uniform Parentage Act incorporated by Family Code §§ 7611‑7612, govern the determination of a parent‑child relationship for heirship purposes even when the relationship was effected outside the state, and that clear and convincing evidence that Charles Bloodgood openly held Judy out as his natural child establishes a presumption of natural parentage that cannot be rebutted on public‑policy grounds alone. Accordingly, Judy is a “natural” child of Charles and, through Charles, an intestate heir of Decedent Loch David Crane. ---