Also known as: familial relationships · family relationship
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
A close connection by blood, marriage, adoption, or law between individuals that triggers specific legal rules or protections in areas such as professional conduct, custody, tort immunity, and donative transfers.
Fiona Foster asked her lawyer to draft a will leaving her a substantial sum. The lawyer prepared the instrument naming himself as beneficiary. Because Fiona and the lawyer maintained a close familial relationship, the preparation did not violate the prohibition on client gifts.
Floyd Franklin sought custody of his niece after her parents died. Floyd had lived with the child for years and shared daily responsibilities. The court recognized his status because he held a familial relationship with the child by blood.
Felix Franco, an unemancipated minor, sued his father for injuries sustained during a family car trip. The father had been exercising ordinary parental supervision at the time. The court dismissed the suit to preserve harmony within the family relationship.
Fernando Farrell's mother died in an accident caused by a third party. Fernando sought damages for loss of her support even though his parents had never married. The familial relationship between mother and child received equal protection regardless of legitimacy.
The appellant brought suit on behalf of five illegitimate children against the doctor who treated their mother and the insurance company. The suit sought recovery under a Louisiana statute for damages resulting from the wrongful death of the mother. These damages included compensation for the loss of the mother as well as for her pain and suffering. Louise Levy gave birth to the five children out of wedlock. The children lived with her and she treated them as a parent would treat any other child. She worked as a domestic servant to support them. She took them to church every Sunday and enrolled them at her own expense in a parochial school. The Louisiana District Court dismissed the suit. The Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal. It held that the term "child" in the statute meant legitimate child. The denial of recovery to illegitimate children rested on morals and general welfare because it discourages bringing children into the world out of wedlock. The Supreme Court of Louisiana denied certiorari. The case reached the United States Supreme Court on appeal. Probable jurisdiction was noted to consider the constitutional challenges under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.
View caseFrancesca Fiore discovered paintings missing from her studio decades earlier. She later learned a relative had quietly transferred one piece through family channels. The court examined whether the familial relationship affected the running of the limitations period.
Georgia O'Keeffe, a renowned artist, had three paintings stolen from An American Place gallery in New York in March 1946. The gallery was operated by her husband Alfred Stieglitz. The paintings subject to this action are "Seaweed" and "Cliffs," with a third painting "Fragments" also missing. O'Keeffe did not report the theft to the police or advertise the loss, though she discussed it with associates. Stieglitz died in the summer of 1946. In 1947 O'Keeffe retained Doris Bry to help settle the estate. Bry urged reporting the loss, but O'Keeffe declined. In 1972, O'Keeffe authorized Bry to report the theft to the Art Dealers Association of America, Inc., which maintains a registry of stolen paintings. In September 1975, O'Keeffe learned that the paintings were in the Andrew Crispo Gallery in New York on consignment from Bernard Danenberg Galleries. On February 11, 1976, O'Keeffe discovered that Ulrich A. Frank had sold the paintings to Barry Snyder for $35,000. She demanded their return, but Snyder refused. O'Keeffe filed her complaint for replevin in March 1976 against Snyder, who impleaded Frank as a third-party defendant. The trial court granted summary judgment to Snyder on the ground that the action was barred by the six-year statute of limitations. The Appellate Division reversed and entered judgment for O'Keeffe. The Supreme Court of New Jersey granted certification to consider the issues. Frank traces his possession of the paintings to his father, Dr. Frank, who died in 1968, claiming to have seen them in his father's apartment as early as 1941-1943. Snyder purchased the paintings from Frank in 1975. There are factual disputes regarding the circumstances of the paintings' disappearance and acquisition.
View caseA lawyer may accept or prepare an instrument for a substantial gift when the recipient is related to the client by blood, marriage, or a close familial relationship. The rule treats such ties as removing the risk of undue influence that the prohibition otherwise addresses.
Supporting sources
A nonparent may establish standing by showing a familial relationship by blood or law together with a substantial emotional bond formed without expectation of compensation. Courts then weigh whether that relationship supports an award of custody or visitation.
Supporting sources
The doctrine shields parents from ordinary negligence claims by unemancipated minors when the conduct involves parental authority or supervision. It rests on preserving family harmony and parental autonomy rather than on the absence of fault.
Supporting sources
…for replevin. Frank traces his possession of the paintings to his father, Dr. Frank, who died in 1968. He claims there is a family relationship by marriage between his family and the Stieglitz family, a contention that O'Keeffe disputes. Frank does not know how his father acquired the paintings, but he recalls seeing them in his…