DOCSLIB.ORG

Inheritance Act, 2002

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Inheritance Act, 2002 INHERITANCE [CH.116 – 1 INHERITANCE CHAPTER 116 INHERITANCE LIST OF AUTHORISED PAGES 1 –27 LRO 1/2002 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I PRELIMINARY 1. Short title. 2. Interpretation. PART II DISTRIBUTION ON INTESTACY 3. Abolition of descent to heir, curtesy, dower. 4. Succession to real and personal estate on intestacy. 5. Devolution of residuary estate to issue and other classes of relatives of intestate. 6. Right of surviving spouse as respects matrimonial home and household chattel. 7. Application to the Court in respect of appropriation. 8. Partial intestacy. 9. Construction of documents. 10. Savings. 11. Interpretation of Part II. PART III PROVISIONS FOR DEPENDANTS 12. Application for financial provision from deceased’s estate. 13. Power of court to make orders. 14. Matters to which court is to have regard in exercising powers under section 13. 15. Time limit for applications. 16. Interim orders. 17. Variation, discharge, etc., of orders for periodical payments. 18. Payment of lump sums by instalments. 19. Property treated as a part of “net estate”. 20. Property held on a joint tenancy. 21. Effect, duration and form of orders. ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– LRO 1/2002 STATUTE LAW OF THE BAHAMAS CH.116 – 2] INHERITANCE 22. Provisions as to personal representatives. 23. Interpretation of Part III. PART IV SUPPLEMENTAL 24. Protection against eviction from matrimonial home of spouse. 25. Protection against eviction from matrimonial home of child. 26. Rules. 27. Application of Act. 28. Rule of survivorship. 29. Repeals. FIRST SCHEDULE — Rights of Surviving Spouse as respects the Matrimonial Home. SECOND SCHEDULE — Repeals. STATUTE LAW OF THE BAHAMAS LRO 1/2002 INHERITANCE [CH.116 – 3 CHAPTER 116 INHERITANCE An Act providing for succession to the property of 3 of 2002 deceased persons, and in particular the testamentary disposition and distribution on intestacy of such property; to make financial provisions for the dependants of deceased persons; and for connected purposes. [Assent 31st January, 2002] [Commencement 1st February, 2002] PART I PRELIMINARY 1. This Act may be cited as the Inheritance Act, 2002. Short title. 2. (1) In this Act — Interpretation. “administration” means, with reference to the real and personal estate of a deceased person, letters of administration, whether general or limited, or with the will annexed or otherwise; “administrator” means a person to whom adminis- tration of an estate is granted; “conveyance” includes a mortgage, charge by way of legal mortgage, lease, assent, vesting declaration, vesting instrument, disclaimer, release and every other assurance of property or of any interest therein by an instrument, except a will, and “convey” has a corresponding meaning; “the court” means the Supreme Court; “disposition” includes a conveyance, a devise, a bequest and an appointment of property contained in a will, and “dispose of” has a corresponding meaning; “equitable interests” means all other interests and charges subsisting in equity or over land or in respect of the proceeds of sale thereof; “income” includes rents and profits; ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– LRO 1/2002 STATUTE LAW OF THE BAHAMAS CH.116 – 4] INHERITANCE “intestate” includes a person who leaves a will but dies intestate as to some beneficial interest in his real or personal estate; “legal estate” means the estate, charge and interest in or over land subsisting or created at law which is by statute authorised to subsist or to be created at law; “personal representative” means the executor (original or by representation) or administrator for the time being of a deceased person; “possession” includes the receipt of rents and profits or the right to receive the same, if any; “probate” means the probate of a will; “probate rules” means rules and orders made by the Ch. 53. Rules Committee established under the Supreme Court Act for regulating the procedure and practice of the Supreme Court in regard to non- contentious or common form probate business; “property” includes a thing in action and any interest in real or personal property; “purchaser” means a lessee, mortgagee or other person who in good faith acquires an interest in property for valuable consideration, also an intending purchaser and “valuable consideration” includes marriage, but does not include a nominal consideration in money; “real estate” save as provided in Part II means real estate, including chattels real, which by virtue of Part II devolves on the personal representative of a deceased person; “Registrar” means the Registrar of the court; “rent” includes a rent service or a rent charge, or other rent, toll, duty, or annual or periodical payment in money or money’s worth, issuing out of or charged upon land but does not include a mortgage interest; “representation” means the probate of a will and administration, and the expression “taking out representation” refers to the obtaining of the probate of a will or of the grant of administra- tion; STATUTE LAW OF THE BAHAMAS LRO 1/2002 INHERITANCE [CH.116 – 5 “will” means a will made in accordance with the provisions of the Wills Act, 2002. Ch. 115. (2) A reference to a child or issue living at the death of any person includes — (a) a child or issue en ventre sa mère at the death; (b) a child in respect of whom an adoption order has been made by any court of competent jurisdic- tion. (3) A reference to the estate of a deceased person includes property over which the deceased exercises a general power of appointment including a statutory power to dispose of an entailed interest by the deceased’s will. PART II DISTRIBUTION ON INTESTACY 3. With regard to the real and personal estate of every Abolition of person dying after the commencement of this Act, there descent to heir, shall be abolished — curtesy, dower. (a) all existing modes, rules and canons of descent, and of devolution by special occupancy or otherwise, of real estate, or of personal estate; (b) tenancy by the curtesy; (c) dower. 4. (1) The residuary estate of an intestate shall be Succession to real distributed in the manner mentioned in this section, and personal estate on namely — intestacy. (a) if the intestate leaves a husband or wife and no children, the surviving husband or wife shall take the whole residuary estate; (b) if the intestate — (i) leaves a husband or wife and — (A) one child, the surviving husband or wife shall take one half of the residuary estate and the remainder shall go to the child; (B) children, the surviving husband or wife shall take one half of the residuary estate and the remainder shall be distributed equally among the children; ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– LRO 1/2002 STATUTE LAW OF THE BAHAMAS CH.116 – 6] INHERITANCE (ii) leaves children but no husband or wife, the residuary estate shall be distributed equally among the children and where there is only one child that child shall take the whole residuary estate; (iii) leaves no husband or wife and no children the residuary estate shall be distributed equally among the grandchildren and where there is only one grandchild that grandchild shall take the whole residuary estate; (iv) leaves no husband or wife, no children or no grandchildren, the residuary estate shall be distributed between his mother and father in equal shares if both survive the intestate, but, if only one survives the intestate, the survivor shall take the whole residuary estate; (v) leaves no husband or wife or children, grandchildren, mother or father, then the residuary estate shall be distributed in the following manner — firstly, to the brothers and sisters of the intestate in equal shares, and in the absence of any, then secondly, to the nephews and nieces of the intestate in equal shares, and in the absence of any, then thirdly, to the grandparents of the intestate and if more than one survive the intestate, in equal shares, but if there is no member of this class, then fourthly, to the uncles and aunts of the intestate (being brothers or sisters of a parent of the intestate) in equal shares, and if none, then fifthly, to the children of uncles and aunts of the intestate (being brothers or sisters of a parent of the intestate) in equal shares; (c) in default of any person taking an absolute interest under the foregoing provisions, the residuary estate of the intestate shall be dis- tributed to the next of kin and in this paragraph “next of kin” means the closest living relative of the intestate. STATUTE LAW OF THE BAHAMAS LRO 1/2002 INHERITANCE [CH.116 – 7 (2) A husband and wife for all purposes of distribu- tion or division under the foregoing provisions of this section shall be treated as two persons. (3) Where the intestate and the intestate’s husband or wife have died in circumstances rending it uncertain which of them survived the other and the intestate’s husband or wife is by virtue of any other law deemed to have survived the intestate, this section shall nevertheless have effect as respects the intestate as if the husband or wife had not survived the intestate. (4) In this Part, “residuary estate” means every beneficial interest (including rights of entry and reverter) of the intestate in real and personal estate, after payment of all such funeral and administration expenses, debts and other liabilities that are properly paid thereout, which (otherwise than in right of a power of appointment) the intestate could, if of full age and capacity, have disposed of by his will. (5) For the purposes of this Part, “brother” or “sister” in relation to an intestate shall include a child of the father or mother of the intestate. 5. (1) Where under this Part the residuary estate of an Devolution of intestate or any part thereof devolves upon or is directed residuary estate to issue and other to be distributed among the issue of the intestate such classes of residuary estate or part thereof shall be distributed in relatives of equal shares, if more than one, among all or any of the intestate.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chinese Privatization: Between Plan and Market
    CHINESE PRIVATIZATION: BETWEEN PLAN AND MARKET LAN CAO* I INTRODUCTION Since 1978, when China adopted its open-door policy and allowed its economy to be exposed to the international market, it has adhered to what Deng Xiaoping called "socialism with Chinese characteristics."1 As a result, it has produced an economy with one of the most rapid growth rates in the world by steadfastly embarking on a developmental strategy of gradual, market-oriented measures while simultaneously remaining nominally socialistic. As I discuss in this article, this strategy of reformthe mere adoption of a market economy while retaining a socialist ownership baseshould similarly be characterized as "privatization with Chinese characteristics,"2 even though it departs markedly from the more orthodox strategy most commonly associated with the term "privatization," at least as that term has been conventionally understood in the context of emerging market or transitional economies. The Russian experience of privatization, for example, represents the more dominant and more favored approach to privatizationcertainly from the point of view of the West and its advisersand is characterized by immediate privatization of the state sector, including the swift and unequivocal transfer of assets from the publicly owned state enterprises to private hands. On the other hand, "privatization with Chinese characteristics" emphasizes not the immediate privatization of the state sector but rather the retention of the state sector with the Copyright © 2001 by Lan Cao This article is also available at http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/63LCPCao. * Professor of Law, College of William and Mary Marshall-Wythe School of Law. At the time the article was written, the author was Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law School.
    [Show full text]
  • Curtailing Inherited Wealth
    Michigan Law Review Volume 89 Issue 1 1990 Curtailing Inherited Wealth Mark L. Ascher University of Arizona College of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr Part of the Law and Society Commons, Legislation Commons, and the Taxation-Federal Estate and Gift Commons Recommended Citation Mark L. Ascher, Curtailing Inherited Wealth, 89 MICH. L. REV. 69 (1990). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol89/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Law Review at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CURTAILING INHERITED WEALTH Mark L. Ascher* INTRODUCTION • • • • • • • • • • • . • • • • • • . • • • • • • • • . • • . • • • • . • • • 70 I. INHERITANCE IN PRINCIPLE........................... 76 A. Inheritance as a Natural Right..................... 76 B. The Positivistic Conception of Inheritance . 77 C. Why the Positivistic Conception Prevailed . 78 D. Inheritance - Property or Garbage?................ 81 E. Constitutional Concerns . 84 II. INHERITANCE AS A MATIER OF POLICY •• • . •••••.. •••• 86 A. Society's Stake in Accumulated Wealth . 86 B. Arguments in Favor of Curtailing Inheritance . 87 1. Leveling the Playing Field . 87 2. Deficit Reduction in a Painless and Appropriate Fashion........................................ 91 3. Protecting Elective Representative Government . 93 4. Increasing Privatization in the Care of the Disabled and the Elderly . 96 5. Expanding Public Ownership of National and International Treasures . 98 6. _Increasing Lifetime Charitable Giving . 98 7. Neutralizing the Co"osive Effects of Wealth..... 99 C. Arguments Against Curtailing Inheritance.
    [Show full text]
  • Opinion, Ross Stanley V. Carolyn Haynes Stanley, No. 13-0960
    IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA January 2014 Term _______________ FILED May 27, 2014 No. 13-0960 released at 3:00 p.m. RORY L. PERRY II, CLERK _______________ SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA ROSS STANLEY, Petitioner Below, Petitioner v. CAROLYN HAYNES STANLEY, Respondent Below, Respondent ____________________________________________________________ Appeal from the Circuit Court of Greenbrier County The Honorable Joseph C. Pomponio, Jr., Judge Civil Action No. 12-D-65 REVERSED ____________________________________________________________ Submitted: May 6, 2014 Filed: May 27, 2014 Martha J. Fleshman, Esq. J. Michael Anderson, Esq. Fleshman Law Office Rainelle, West Virginia Lewisburg, West Virginia Counsel for the Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner JUSTICE KETCHUM delivered the Opinion of the Court. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. W.Va. Code § 43-1-2(b) [1992] requires any married person who conveys an interest in real estate to notify his or her spouse within thirty days of the time of the conveyance if the conveyance involves an interest in real estate to which dower would have attached if the conveyance had been made before dower was abolished in 1992. 2. Under W.Va. Code § 43-1-2(d) [1992], when a married person fails to comply with the notice requirement contained in W.Va. Code § 43-1-2(b) [1992], then in the event of a subsequent divorce within five years of the conveyance, the value of the real estate conveyed, as determined at the time of the conveyance, shall be deemed a part of the conveyancer’s marital property for purposes of determining equitable distribution. i Justice Ketchum: Petitioner Ross Stanley (“petitioner husband”) appeals the July 30, 2013, order of the Circuit Court of Greenbrier County that reversed the April 19, 2013, order of the Family Court of Greenbrier County.
    [Show full text]
  • Privatization and Property in Biology Joan E
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Washington University St. Louis: Open Scholarship Washington University in St. Louis Washington University Open Scholarship Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations Biology 6-2014 Privatization and Property in Biology Joan E. Strassmann Washington University in St Louis, [email protected] David C. Queller Washington University in St Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/bio_facpubs Part of the Behavior and Ethology Commons, and the Biology Commons Recommended Citation Strassmann, Joan E. and Queller, David C., "Privatization and Property in Biology" (2014). Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations. 49. https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/bio_facpubs/49 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Biology at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Biology Faculty Publications & Presentations by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. 1 Privatization and property in biology 2 3 Joan E. Strassmann & David C. Queller 4 5 Department of Biology, Campus Box 1137 6 WasHington University in St. Louis 7 One Brookings Drive 8 St. Louis MO 63130 9 10 Corresponding autHor: Joan E. Strassmann 11 phone: 01-832-978-5961 12 email: [email protected] 13 14 6191 words 1 15 ABSTRACT 16 17 Organisms evolve to control, preserve, protect and invest in their own bodies. When 18 they do likewise with external resources they privatize those resources and convert 19 tHem into tHeir own property. Property is a neglected topic in biology, though 20 examples include territories, domiciles and nest structures, food cacHing, mate 21 guarding, and the resources and partners in mutualisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Hidden Risks in Real Estate Title Transactions
    Cleveland State Law Review Volume 19 Issue 1 Article 14 1970 Hidden Risks in Real Estate Title Transactions Sherman Hollander Follow this and additional works at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev Part of the Housing Law Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! Recommended Citation Sherman Hollander, Hidden Risks in Real Estate Title Transactions, 19 Clev. St. L. Rev. 111 (1970) available at https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/clevstlrev/vol19/iss1/14 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at EngagedScholarship@CSU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cleveland State Law Review by an authorized editor of EngagedScholarship@CSU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Hidden Risks in Real Estate Title Transactions Sherman Hollander* N o AMOUNT OF CARE can avoid certain of the title hazards which a real estate transaction may encounter. The most careful attorney can do little or nothing, in such situations, to sidestep the pitfalls. In at least some such cases the legislature could provide relief by reducing the risk to innocent parties. To do so requires perceptive review of some time- honored concepts. A number of types of other problems exist where a careful attorney may reduce the risk faced by his client. Even here perhaps the legis- lature could consider statutory improvements. It would be more fair and equitable if extraordinary care were not required to prevent an un- just result. Dower Interest One vestige of English Common Law which still operates in Ohio and may be the source of increasing losses to innocent parties in the future is dower.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Union and Domestic Partmerships
    Civil Union and Domestic Partmerships January 2014 In 2000, Vermont became the first state to recognize same-sex civil unions following the 1999 decision of Vermont’s Supreme Court in Baker v. Vermont, 744 A.2d 864 (Vt. 1999), holding that the state’s prohibition on same-sex marriage violated the Vermont Constitution. The court ordered the Vermont legislature either to allow same-sex marriages or to implement an alternative legal mechanism according similar rights to same-sex couples. As of November, 2013, these jurisdictions have laws providing for the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples: California. Connecticut. Delaware. District of Columbia. Hawaii Illinois Iowa. Maine. Maryland. Massachusetts. Minnesota. New Hampshire. New Mexico New York. Rhode Island. Vermont. Washington. The following jurisdictions provide the equivalent of state-level spousal rights to same- sex couples within the state: Colorado. District of Columbia. Nevada. New Jersey. Oregon. Wisconsin. If a state does not appear on the following chart, it is because we have not found a state statute on the topic. In some cases provisions only exist for public employees. To check whether there is pending or recently enacted legislation, please click here. Click the letter corresponding to the state name below. Please note: This material is for personal use only and is protected by U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17 USC). It is provided as general information only and does not constitute and is not a substitute for legal or other professional advice. Reliance upon this material is solely at your own risk. | C | D | H | I | M | N | O | R | V | W State Statute California 297.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economics of Dowry and Brideprice
    Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 21, Number 4—Fall 2007—Pages 151–174 The Economics of Dowry and Brideprice Siwan Anderson ayments between families at the time of marriage existed during the history of most developed countries and are currently pervasive in many areas of P the developing world. These payments can be substantial enough to affect the welfare of women and a society’s distribution of wealth. Recent estimates document transfers per marriage amounting to six times the annual household income in South Asia (Rao, 1993), and four times in sub-Saharan Africa (Dekker and Hoogeveen, 2002). This paper first establishes some basic facts about the prevalence and magni- tude of marriage payments. It then discusses how such patterns vary across coun- tries depending upon economic conditions, societal structures, institutions, and family characteristics. Such payments have also evolved within societies over time. For example, in some periods such payments have risen sharply. In some cases, payments have shifted from the grooms’ sides to the brides’, and vice versa. Also, property rights over such payments have sometimes shifted between marrying partners and parental generations. Economists, who have only recently begun to work on the topic, have focused on explaining these facts. The second part of the paper addresses this economic literature. Though considerable insight into many of the facts has been gained, many of the existing economic explanations are weakly convincing, and many puzzles remain. One crucial difficulty is that solid data in this field have been extremely rare. The descriptions of marriage payments in this paper are synthe- sized from a patchwork of studies across periods, places, and even epochs, and there are doubtless numerous cases which remain undocumented.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Kentucky Inheritance and Estate Taxes
    A Guide to Kentucky Inheritance and Estate Taxes GENERAL INFORMATION Kentucky Department of Revenue The purpose of this booklet is to help achieve the mission of the Kentucky Department of Revenue by offering general information concerning the Kentucky inheritance and estate tax. Kentucky Department of Revenue Mission Statement As part of the Finance and Administration Cabinet, the mission of the Kentucky Department of Revenue is to administer tax laws, collect revenue, and provide services in a fair, courteous, and efficient manner for the benefit of the Commonwealth and its citizens. * * * * * * * * * * * * * The Kentucky Department of Revenue does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, veteran status, genetic information or ancestry in employment or the provision of services. If you have a question concerning any information contained in this booklet, or if you have any questions pertaining to a technical issue, please contact the Financial Tax Section, Kentucky Department of Revenue, Station 61, 501 High Street, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-2103 or (502) 564-4810. INTRODUCTION Kentucky has two death taxes. Inheritance Tax The Kentucky inheritance tax is a tax on a beneficiary’s right to receive property from a deceased person. The amount of the inheritance tax depends on the relationship of the beneficiary to the deceased person and the value of the property. Most of the time, the closer the relationship the greater the exemption and the smaller the tax rate. All property belonging to a resident of Kentucky is subject to the tax except for real estate located in another state.
    [Show full text]
  • Utilitarianism and Wealth Transfer Taxation
    Utilitarianism and Wealth Transfer Taxation Jennifer Bird-Pollan* This article is the third in a series examining the continued relevance and philosophical legitimacy of the United States wealth transfer tax system from within a particular philosophical perspective. The article examines the utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill and his philosophical progeny and distinguishes the philosophical approach of utilitarianism from contemporary welfare economics, primarily on the basis of the concept of “utility” in each approach. After explicating the utilitarian criteria for ethical action, the article goes on to think through what Mill’s utilitarianism says about the taxation of wealth and wealth transfers, the United States federal wealth transfer tax system as it stands today, and what structural changes might improve the system under a utilitarian framework. I. INTRODUCTION A nation’s tax laws can be seen as its manifested distributive justice ideals. While it is clear that the United States’ Tax Code contains a variety of provisions aimed at particular non-distributive justice goals,1 underneath the political * James and Mary Lassiter Associate Professor of Law, University of Kentucky College of Law. Thanks for useful comments on the project go to participants in the National Tax Association meeting, the Loyola Los Angeles Law School Tax Colloquium, the Tax Roundtable at the Vienna University of Economics and Business Institute for Austrian and International Tax Law, and the University of Kentucky College of Law Brown Bag Workshop, as well as Professors Albertina Antognini, Richard Ausness, Stefan Bird-Pollan, Zach Bray, Jake Brooks, Miranda Perry Fleischer, Brian Frye, Brian Galle, Michael Healy, Kathy Moore, Katherine Pratt, Ted Seto, and Andrew Woods.
    [Show full text]
  • Married in Kentucky: a Surviving Spouse's Dower Right in Personalty Elizabeth S
    Kentucky Law Journal Volume 96 | Issue 1 Article 4 2007 Married in Kentucky: A Surviving Spouse's Dower Right in Personalty Elizabeth S. Muyskens University of Kentucky Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj Part of the Estates and Trusts Commons, and the Family Law Commons Click here to let us know how access to this document benefits oy u. Recommended Citation Muyskens, Elizabeth S. (2007) "Married in Kentucky: A Surviving Spouse's Dower Right in Personalty," Kentucky Law Journal: Vol. 96 : Iss. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/klj/vol96/iss1/4 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in Kentucky Law Journal by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NOTES Married in Kentucky: A Surviving Spouse's Dower Right in Personalty Elizabeth S. Muyskensl K ENTUCKY is not only unusual for retaining some form of the common law rule of dower through statute,' but also for including personal property in its dower statute. Common law limited dower to real estate3 and, in most states, the right to dower has been replaced with elective share statutes.4 In Kentucky, if an individual dies intestate, their surviving spouse is entitled to an estate in fee of one-half of the real estate the other spouse owned in fee simple at death, a life estate in one-third of the real estate the other spouse owned in fee simple during his or her marriage but not at the time of death,
    [Show full text]
  • Marriage Annulment - the Need for Legislation
    University of Miami Law Review Volume 24 Number 1 Article 7 10-1-1969 Marriage Annulment - The Need for Legislation Beverly A. Rowan Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr Recommended Citation Beverly A. Rowan, Marriage Annulment - The Need for Legislation, 24 U. Miami L. Rev. 112 (1969) Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umlr/vol24/iss1/7 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Miami Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Miami School of Law Institutional Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MARRIAGE ANNULMENT-THE NEED FOR LEGISLATION BEVERLY A. ROWAN* I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................... 112 II. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE ACTION .......................................... 114 III. THE FLORIDA POSITION .................................................. 114 IV. THE VOID-VOIDABLE DISTINCTION .......................................... 116 V . GROUNDS ................................................................ 118 A . Incest ............................................................... 118 B . Bigamy ............................................................. 119 C . Im potency .......................................................... 120 D. M ental Incompetency ................................................ 121 E. Intoxication or Influence of Drugs ...................................
    [Show full text]
  • Intestate Inheritance Rights for Adopted Persons
    STATE STATUTES Current Through February 2016 WHAT’S INSIDE Intestate Inheritance Rights Birth parents and for Adopted Persons adopted children Adoptive parents and Leaving a will is the best way to ensure that heirs or adopted children descendants may inherit from your estate. Issues of property distribution may arise when a birth parent Adopted children who are not included in a will or adoptive parent dies without making a valid will or without naming an heir to particular property Summaries of State laws (referred to as intestacy). In these cases, State law determines who may inherit from whom. Laws in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, To find statute Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, information for a and the Virgin Islands specify an adopted person’s particular State, right to inherit from the estate of either adoptive or go to birth parents. https://www.childwelfare. gov/topics/systemwide/ laws-policies/state/. Children’s Bureau/ACYF/ACF/HHS 800.394.3366 | Email: [email protected] | https://www.childwelfare.gov Intestate Inheritance Rights for Adopted Persons https://www.childwelfare.gov Birth Parents and Adopted Children Adoptive Parents and Adopted Generally, the court decree that finalizes the adoption Children ends the legal relationship between the birth parent Upon the entry of the final adoption decree, the adopted (also referred to as the biological or natural parent in child is treated by law as if he or she had been born to the the statutes) and the adopted child. There are, however, adopting parents. The adopted child, therefore, gains the exceptions to this policy in some States.
    [Show full text]