Also known as: hereditas · haereditates · inheritance · hereditament
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
An estate or inheritance that passes by operation of law to heirs upon the death of the owner.
Harold Hunt persuaded his elderly aunt to execute a new will excluding his cousin Hugo Hart by falsely claiming Hugo had stolen family funds. After the aunt died, Hugo discovered the deception and sued Harold for the value of the haereditas he would have received under the prior will. The court held Harold liable because his fraud intentionally prevented Hugo from receiving the inheritance he otherwise would have obtained.
Hector Huerta and his sister Harper Hill both claimed shares of their uncle's intestate estate. Although Hector shared only one grandparent with the decedent while Harper shared two, the court awarded them equal shares of the haereditas because the statute directs that an heir inherits without regard to how many common ancestors in the same generation the heir shares with the decedent.
Heidi Henderson gave birth to a son out of wedlock and died intestate. The son sought to inherit the haereditas but the state required that paternity be established during the father's lifetime. The court upheld the denial of the claim because the requirement substantially relates to the state's interest in orderly disposition of property by reducing fraud and uncertainty in inheritance claims.
Hana Huang, as personal representative, filed a closing statement asserting that she had paid all claims, taxes, and expenses and distributed the remaining assets of the haereditas to the entitled persons. Because the statement complied with the statutory requirements, the court approved closure of the estate and terminated her appointment one year later.
Highland Farms sought to deny inheritance rights to a nonmarital child of a deceased partner. The court applied intermediate scrutiny and struck down the absolute bar on the child's claim to the haereditas because the classification based on birth status was not substantially related to an important governmental interest in preventing fraudulent claims.
Deta Mona Trimble is the illegitimate daughter of Jessie Trimble and Sherman Gordon. Trimble and Gordon lived together in Chicago with Deta Mona from 1970 until Gordon died in 1974 as the victim of a homicide. On January 2, 1973, the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, entered a paternity order finding Gordon to be the father of Deta Mona and ordering him to pay fifteen dollars per week for her support. Gordon thereafter supported Deta Mona in accordance with the paternity order and openly acknowledged her as his child. Gordon died intestate at the age of twenty-eight, leaving an estate consisting only of a 1974 Plymouth automobile worth approximately twenty-five hundred dollars. Shortly after Gordon's death, Trimble, as the mother and next friend of Deta Mona, filed a petition for letters of administration, determination of heirship, and declaratory relief in the Probate Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County. That court entered an order determining heirship, identifying as the only heirs of Gordon his father Joseph Gordon, his mother Ethel King, and his brother, two sisters, and a half brother. The Circuit Court excluded Deta Mona on the authority of section twelve of the Illinois Probate Act. The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court on the authority of its earlier decision in In re Estate of Karas. The United States Supreme Court noted probable jurisdiction to consider the arguments that section twelve violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by invidiously discriminating on the basis of illegitimacy and sex.
View caseHorizon Dynamics, a student organization, was denied access to university funds available to other groups because its publication addressed religious topics. The court held that once the university created a limited public forum for student speech, it could not exclude groups based on the religious viewpoint of their message concerning the haereditas of ideas.
The University of Virginia, an instrumentality of the Commonwealth of Virginia, maintains a Student Activities Fund financed by a mandatory $14 per semester fee assessed to each full-time student. The fund supports extracurricular student activities related to the University's educational purpose through payments to third-party contractors for approved groups that qualify as Contracted Independent Organizations. To obtain CIO status, a student group must be composed primarily of University students, file its constitution, pledge nondiscrimination, and agree to a disclaimer stating that it is independent of the University. CIO publications are eligible for printing-cost reimbursement if their content is related to the University's educational purpose, but the Guidelines expressly exclude funding for any activity that primarily promotes or manifests a particular belief in or about a deity or an ultimate reality. In 1990, University of Virginia undergraduates formed Wide Awake Productions as a CIO and began publishing Wide Awake: A Christian Perspective at the University of Virginia. The first issue contained articles on racism, crisis pregnancy, prayer, C. S. Lewis, and reviews of religious music, each marked by a cross; subsequent issues addressed homosexuality, missionary work, eating disorders, and Christian theology, with advertisements from churches and Christian bookstores. In 1991, Wide Awake Productions requested $5,862 from the Student Activities Fund to cover printing costs for one issue. The Appropriations Committee of the Student Council denied the request on the ground that the publication constituted a religious activity under the Guidelines. Wide Awake Productions appealed the denial through the Student Council and the Student Activities Committee, which upheld the decision. The group and three of its student editors and members then filed suit in the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that the refusal to pay printing costs violated their rights under the First Amendment Speech, Press, and Free Exercise Clauses and the Equal Protection Clause. On cross-motions for summary judgment, the District Court ruled for the University. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.
View caseLiability arises when a person intentionally uses fraud, duress, or other tortious means to prevent another from receiving an inheritance or gift from a third person that the other would otherwise have received. The injured party may recover the value of the lost inheritance or gift.
Supporting sources
No. Under the Uniform Probate Code, an heir inherits without regard to how many common ancestors in the same generation the heir shares with the decedent. Shares are determined by degree of relationship, not by counting shared ancestors.
Supporting sources
Yes. A state may impose this requirement because it is substantially related to the important governmental interest in the orderly and efficient disposition of property at death by reducing fraud and uncertainty in inheritance claims.
Supporting sources
The statement must confirm that all presented claims, administrative expenses, and taxes have been paid or otherwise disposed of, that assets have been distributed to entitled persons, and that any remaining undischarged claims are either subject to distributee agreement or covered by other arrangements.
Supporting sources
…only the potentiality of life. Similarly, unborn children have been recognized as acquiring rights or interests by way of inheritance or other devolution of property, and have been represented by guardians ad litem. Perfection of the interests involved, again, has generally been contingent upon live birth. In…