Estate of Martino: Rethinking stepchild inheritance under intestacy

When a person dies without a will or trust in California, the Probate Code supplies a default distribution scheme known as intestate succession. The first step in this process is identifying the decedent's heirs and the order in which they may inherit. At the top of that order are the decedent's surviving spouse and/or "issue," or lineal descendants, which by statute includes both biological and adopted children. Prob. C. §§ 6402, 6450-6451. Stepchildren, however, have traditionally faced an uphill battle.

Historically, a stepchild's path to inheritance was only through Probate Code section 6402.5 (which applies in limited instances when the biological parent died first and the nonbiological stepparent died without any surviving spouse or issue of their own within prescribed time periods) or Probate Code section 6454 (for equitable adoption, which states that a stepchild may inherit only if the relationship with the stepparent began during the child's minority, continued throughout their joint lifetimes, and the stepparent would have adopted them but for a legal barrier). These narrow and demanding standards have led many to assume that stepchildren cannot inherit at all unless they meet these onerous requirements.

However, the California Court of Appeal's recent decision in Estate of Martino (2023) 96 Cal.App.5th 596 disrupts that assumption. Reading Probate Code section 6453 together with the Uniform Parentage Act, the Court confirmed that a stepchild (or other nonbiological child) may establish heirship by proving the decedent: (1) received the child into the home and (2) openly held the child out as their own, under Family Code section 7611(d). Once that prima facie showing is made, Family Code section 7612(a) shifts the burden to the objector to rebut the presumption by clear and convincing evidence.

Estate of Martino (2023) 96 Cal.App.5th 596

In Estate of Martino (2023) 96 Cal.App.5th 596, the Court of Appeal considered whether a stepchild could inherit under intestacy without satisfying the standards for equitable adoption, as codified under Probate Code section 6454's demanding requirement that a stepchild prove the stepparent would have adopted them but for a legal barrier, usually the objection of a biological parent. There, the decedent, John Nick Martino, had a close relationship with his stepson, Nick Zambito, that began during Martino's six-year marriage to Zambito's mother and continued long after the marriage ended. Throughout Zambito's childhood and adulthood, Martino treated him as his son, and friends and family consistently understood the relationship as that of parent and child. However, Martino never formally adopted Zambito because the biological father opposed it during Zambito's minority, thereby creating a legal barrier at the time.

Although the legal barrier no longer existed once Zambito reached adulthood, Martino never pursued adoption. After Martino's death, Zambito petitioned for heirship and acknowledged that Probate Code section 6454 could not provide relief, as the legal barrier to adoption had not persisted throughout the decedent's lifetime, once Zambito reached the age of majority. Instead, he argued that Martino openly held him out as his natural child, which should qualify him to inherit under Probate Code section 6453.

The Court of Appeal agreed. Probate Code section 6453 provides that a natural parent-child relationship exists where that relationship is presumed and not rebutted under the Uniform Parentage Act. The Uniform Parentage Act, codified in the Family Code, defines a "natural parent" to include nonbiological and nonadoptive parents, and Family Code section 7611(d) presumes parentage where a person receives a child into their home and openly holds the child out as their own.

Because Martino had received Zambito into his home as a child and again as an adult, consistently referred to him as his son, and was recognized by friends and family as standing in a parental role, the court held that Zambito qualified as Martino's child for purposes of intestate succession. In doing so, the court confirmed that Probate Code section 6454 is not the exclusive route for stepchildren to inherit and that section 6453 provides a broader, independent pathway.

Burden shifting and evidentiary standards

This new route for establishing heirship under Martino is made especially effective by its burden-shifting framework, which requires only a preponderance of the evidence to invoke the presumption while placing the far heavier clear and convincing standard on those who would rebut it. Probate Code section 6453 provides that a natural parent-child relationship is established where that relationship is presumed and not rebutted under the Uniform Parentage Act. Family Code section 7611(d) creates such a presumption. Reading these provisions together, a claimant establishes a parent-child relationship for intestacy purposes upon showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the statutory elements of section 7611(d) are met. Once established, Family Code section 7612(a) makes the presumption rebuttable only by clear and convincing evidence, thereby shifting the burden of this heightened standard to the opponent.

Implications

For practitioners, Martino clarifies another avenue to help nonbiological children establish their rightful heirship. To do so, counsel should present evidence of how the child was integrated into the home, how the relationship was presented publicly, and how the family and community perceived it. In the end, the question is simply whether the evidence shows it is more likely than not that the decedent treated the child as their own. Once that is established, opponents face the burden of rebutting this presumption by the heightened standard of clear and convincing evidence.

The decision authorizes a substantially broader and much-needed pathway for nonbiological children to inherit by recognizing a parent-child relationship where a presumed parent receives a child into the home and openly holds them out as their own. It eliminates the hurdles of equitable adoption under Probate Code section 6454 and common law doctrines, and in doing so, brings intestate succession into closer alignment with lived family realities--ensuring that when a parent and child have built a genuine lifelong bond, the law does not erase it for lack of formal adoption.