Appellant
Adolph J. Levy
Appellee
State of Louisiana
Appellant's Claim
That a Louisiana law denying illegitimate children the right to recover damages for their mother's wrongful death violates the constitutional guarantee ofDue Process and Equal Protection Clauses under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Norman Dorsen
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
William A. Porteous III
Justices for the Court
William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas (writing for the Court), Abe Fortas, Thurgood Marshall, Earl Warren, Byron R. White
Justices Dissenting
Hugo Lafayette Black, John Marshall Harlan II, Potter Stewart
Place
Washington D.C.
Date of Decision
20 May 1968
Decision
The Court ruled in favor of Levy and overturned two lower court decisions byfinding that he has the right to claim for wrongful death damages.
Significance
This decision recognized the rights of illegitimate children as similar to the rights of others. The Court recognized illegitimate children as "persons" under Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision held that a state can not create a common legal right for children for certain issues and excludeillegitimate children from the benefit of such a right. The ruling togetherwith later court decisions began defining children's rights more thoroughly.
The Fourteenth Amendment, passed in the wake of the Civil War, stated in partthat no state could "deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This portion of the amendment became known as the Equal Protection Clause.
In regard to expected social behavior in the United States, illegitimacy haslong been considered a "sin" by many. Social perceptions of adultery and illegitimacy were the subject of Nathaniel Hawthorne's classic 1850 novel, TheScarlet Letter, which depicts Hester Prynne, a woman who was punished when it was found that she was guilty of adultery and refused to name the father of her illegitimate child. Many moral issues and stigmas of seventeenth century Puritan society, including unwed motherhood and illegitimate children, were still apparent in American society as the twentieth century drew to a close. Prynne was ostracized by her community, but still able to contribute to it.
In American law, children born out of wedlock were often distinguished from those born in marriage. States assigned a special, more limited legal status to illegitimate children. Typically, the various laws were often inconsistentleading to confusion over the actual legal status of illegitimate children inspecific situations. For instance, according to Louisiana law, illegitimatechildren acknowledged by their father were considered natural children. Children with unknown fathers were identified by the title of bastard.
As with many states, Louisiana followed a distinctive course in its restrictions related to common law marriages and illegitimacy. For example, a common-law wife was able to sue under the Louisiana wrongful death statute in the event of the death of her husband. Also, an illegitimate child born to a marriedwoman was normally presumed legitimate. Louisiana made no distinction of legitimacy where incest was a factor. A mother economically dependent on an illegitimate child would be eligible for monetary awards under the Louisiana Workmen's Compensation Act if the child was killed in a work-related accident.
The Levy Family
Louise Levy gave birth to five illegitimate children. They all lived with herand she raised them as any parent would. For an income, Levy worked as a domestic servant. They routinely attended church every Sunday and were enrolledat a parochial school at the family expense. Upon her death, one son, AdolphJ. Levy, filed a wrongful death suit under a Louisiana law on behalf of all five children. The suit was against the doctor who treated the mother and theinsurance company. Levy claimed two types of damages, the loss of their mother and their pain and suffering.
The Louisiana District Court dismissed the case because of their birth circumstance. The appeals court, in affirming the district court's decision, held that an illegitimate child was not a surviving "child" under state law. Intentof the law was to maintain acceptable "morals and general welfare" by discouraging child birth out of wedlock. After the state supreme court denied the case, Levy appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
An Important Reversal: Illegitimate Children as Persons
By vote of 6-3, the Court reversed the two lower court rulings that illegitimate children could not make wrongful death claims under Louisiana law. Justice Douglas, writing a very brief opinion for the majority, first assessed whether illegitimate children were "persons" under the Constitution. Douglas quickly came to the conclusion that they clearly are "persons" within the meaningof the Equal Protection Clause.
The courts had long recognized that states held broad power in making classifications among their citizens. However, Justice Douglas ruled that states maynot discriminate against a particular class. Under the Equal Protection Clause, a state's decisions in making classifications must be rational. In this regard, Douglas could not comprehend how an illegitimate child could not havethe same rights as others under the clause. Douglas wrote,
How could legitimacy of birth have any bearing on the "wrong allegedly inflicted on the mother"?, Douglas pondered. The Levy children were dependent on her biologically and spiritually as much as any other well-cared for children,and upon her death they suffered no less pain by being illegitimate.
In dissent, joined by Justice Black and Justice Stewart, Justice Harlan expressed strong concerns. He could not understand why a state must consider biological relations when recognizing legal relationships. He wrote, "It is, frankly, preposterous to suggest that the State has made illegitimates into nonpersons" as Douglas assumed in reaching his determination.
Harlan argued the state was free to recognize family relationship only between married couples for certain legal purposes. Harlan wrote,
An Important Reversal
In addressing the rights of illegitimate children, Levy was the firstSupreme Court case recognizing that illegitimate children may have the same rights as legitimate children under the Equal Protection Clause. The ruling provided a basis for later rulings concerning legitimacy related to workers' compensation survivors benefits in Weber v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1972), and social security benefits in Mathews v. Lucas (1976). The Court found in Weber that penalizing individuals for something theyhad no responsibility for, the conduct of their parents before they were born, was highly unjust under the law. The Court also supported a mother recovering wrongful death damages for the death of an illegitimate son in Glona v. American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Co. (1968).
Regarding inheritance issues, the Court was less consistent in recognizing the rights of illegitimate children. The Court ruled in Labine v. Vincent (1971) that a state could prohibit illegitimate children from claiming inheritance from a father who left no will. The decision actually followed the same line of reasoning as Harlan's dissenting comments in Levy. The Court should not be so quick to override the state's authority to regulate its citizens. The Court later wavered in close votes on other inheritance rulings.In family law, Levy was one of several crucial rulings that began defining children's rights.
Related Cases
Common Law Marriage
Common law marriage is based on an agreement between two legally competent persons to marry followed by a significant period of living together as husbandand wife. The marriage does not rely on ceremony or the completion of specific legal procedures.
Common law marriage is rooted in ancient Roman and early English custom before the mid-1700s. Marriage, then, merely required an agreement to be married and cohabitate. In early America, courts found this form of marriage valid under common law. Marriage law in the United States was left to the states, andby the 1800s many states began requiring marriage ceremonies and other legalformalities including licenses. By the 1990s, only 14 states still recognizedcommon-law marriage.
Legal standards have been established for couples to prove common-law marriages. These standards require consent and mutual agreement to be married, longand consistent cohabitation, and intentional public representation as a married couple. A legally recognized marriage is vital since it affects property rights, insurance and pension benefits, taxation, parenthood issues, and divorce. Establishing whether a marriage is legal or not is essential when a common-law marriage is challenged in any of these areas.
Sources
West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 3. Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN:West Publishing, 1998.
Adolph J. Levy
Appellee
State of Louisiana
Appellant's Claim
That a Louisiana law denying illegitimate children the right to recover damages for their mother's wrongful death violates the constitutional guarantee ofDue Process and Equal Protection Clauses under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Norman Dorsen
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
William A. Porteous III
Justices for the Court
William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas (writing for the Court), Abe Fortas, Thurgood Marshall, Earl Warren, Byron R. White
Justices Dissenting
Hugo Lafayette Black, John Marshall Harlan II, Potter Stewart
Place
Washington D.C.
Date of Decision
20 May 1968
Decision
The Court ruled in favor of Levy and overturned two lower court decisions byfinding that he has the right to claim for wrongful death damages.
Significance
This decision recognized the rights of illegitimate children as similar to the rights of others. The Court recognized illegitimate children as "persons" under Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision held that a state can not create a common legal right for children for certain issues and excludeillegitimate children from the benefit of such a right. The ruling togetherwith later court decisions began defining children's rights more thoroughly.
The Fourteenth Amendment, passed in the wake of the Civil War, stated in partthat no state could "deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This portion of the amendment became known as the Equal Protection Clause.
In regard to expected social behavior in the United States, illegitimacy haslong been considered a "sin" by many. Social perceptions of adultery and illegitimacy were the subject of Nathaniel Hawthorne's classic 1850 novel, TheScarlet Letter, which depicts Hester Prynne, a woman who was punished when it was found that she was guilty of adultery and refused to name the father of her illegitimate child. Many moral issues and stigmas of seventeenth century Puritan society, including unwed motherhood and illegitimate children, were still apparent in American society as the twentieth century drew to a close. Prynne was ostracized by her community, but still able to contribute to it.
In American law, children born out of wedlock were often distinguished from those born in marriage. States assigned a special, more limited legal status to illegitimate children. Typically, the various laws were often inconsistentleading to confusion over the actual legal status of illegitimate children inspecific situations. For instance, according to Louisiana law, illegitimatechildren acknowledged by their father were considered natural children. Children with unknown fathers were identified by the title of bastard.
As with many states, Louisiana followed a distinctive course in its restrictions related to common law marriages and illegitimacy. For example, a common-law wife was able to sue under the Louisiana wrongful death statute in the event of the death of her husband. Also, an illegitimate child born to a marriedwoman was normally presumed legitimate. Louisiana made no distinction of legitimacy where incest was a factor. A mother economically dependent on an illegitimate child would be eligible for monetary awards under the Louisiana Workmen's Compensation Act if the child was killed in a work-related accident.
The Levy Family
Louise Levy gave birth to five illegitimate children. They all lived with herand she raised them as any parent would. For an income, Levy worked as a domestic servant. They routinely attended church every Sunday and were enrolledat a parochial school at the family expense. Upon her death, one son, AdolphJ. Levy, filed a wrongful death suit under a Louisiana law on behalf of all five children. The suit was against the doctor who treated the mother and theinsurance company. Levy claimed two types of damages, the loss of their mother and their pain and suffering.
The Louisiana District Court dismissed the case because of their birth circumstance. The appeals court, in affirming the district court's decision, held that an illegitimate child was not a surviving "child" under state law. Intentof the law was to maintain acceptable "morals and general welfare" by discouraging child birth out of wedlock. After the state supreme court denied the case, Levy appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
An Important Reversal: Illegitimate Children as Persons
By vote of 6-3, the Court reversed the two lower court rulings that illegitimate children could not make wrongful death claims under Louisiana law. Justice Douglas, writing a very brief opinion for the majority, first assessed whether illegitimate children were "persons" under the Constitution. Douglas quickly came to the conclusion that they clearly are "persons" within the meaningof the Equal Protection Clause.
The courts had long recognized that states held broad power in making classifications among their citizens. However, Justice Douglas ruled that states maynot discriminate against a particular class. Under the Equal Protection Clause, a state's decisions in making classifications must be rational. In this regard, Douglas could not comprehend how an illegitimate child could not havethe same rights as others under the clause. Douglas wrote,
The rights asserted here involve the intimate, familial relationship between a childand his own mother. When the child's claim of damage for loss of his motheris in issue, why, in terms of "equal protection," should the tortfeasors go free merely because the child is illegitimate? Why should the illegitimate child be denied rights merely because of his birth out of wedlock? He certainlyis subject to all the responsibilities of a citizen, including the payment oftaxes and conscription under the Selective Service Act.
How could legitimacy of birth have any bearing on the "wrong allegedly inflicted on the mother"?, Douglas pondered. The Levy children were dependent on her biologically and spiritually as much as any other well-cared for children,and upon her death they suffered no less pain by being illegitimate.
In dissent, joined by Justice Black and Justice Stewart, Justice Harlan expressed strong concerns. He could not understand why a state must consider biological relations when recognizing legal relationships. He wrote, "It is, frankly, preposterous to suggest that the State has made illegitimates into nonpersons" as Douglas assumed in reaching his determination.
Harlan argued the state was free to recognize family relationship only between married couples for certain legal purposes. Harlan wrote,
It islogical to enforce these requirements by declaring that the general class ofrights that are dependent upon family relationships shall be accorded only when the formalities as well as the biology of those relationships are present. . . I could not understand why a State which bases the right to recover for wrongful death strictly on family relationships could not demand that thoserelationships be formalized.
An Important Reversal
In addressing the rights of illegitimate children, Levy was the firstSupreme Court case recognizing that illegitimate children may have the same rights as legitimate children under the Equal Protection Clause. The ruling provided a basis for later rulings concerning legitimacy related to workers' compensation survivors benefits in Weber v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. (1972), and social security benefits in Mathews v. Lucas (1976). The Court found in Weber that penalizing individuals for something theyhad no responsibility for, the conduct of their parents before they were born, was highly unjust under the law. The Court also supported a mother recovering wrongful death damages for the death of an illegitimate son in Glona v. American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Co. (1968).
Regarding inheritance issues, the Court was less consistent in recognizing the rights of illegitimate children. The Court ruled in Labine v. Vincent (1971) that a state could prohibit illegitimate children from claiming inheritance from a father who left no will. The decision actually followed the same line of reasoning as Harlan's dissenting comments in Levy. The Court should not be so quick to override the state's authority to regulate its citizens. The Court later wavered in close votes on other inheritance rulings.In family law, Levy was one of several crucial rulings that began defining children's rights.
Related Cases
- Glona v. American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Co., 391 U.S.68 (1968).
- Labine v. Vincent, 401 U.S. 532 (1971).
- Weber v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 406 U.S. 164 (1972).
- Mathews v. Lucas, 427 U.S. 495 (1976).
Common Law Marriage
Common law marriage is based on an agreement between two legally competent persons to marry followed by a significant period of living together as husbandand wife. The marriage does not rely on ceremony or the completion of specific legal procedures.
Common law marriage is rooted in ancient Roman and early English custom before the mid-1700s. Marriage, then, merely required an agreement to be married and cohabitate. In early America, courts found this form of marriage valid under common law. Marriage law in the United States was left to the states, andby the 1800s many states began requiring marriage ceremonies and other legalformalities including licenses. By the 1990s, only 14 states still recognizedcommon-law marriage.
Legal standards have been established for couples to prove common-law marriages. These standards require consent and mutual agreement to be married, longand consistent cohabitation, and intentional public representation as a married couple. A legally recognized marriage is vital since it affects property rights, insurance and pension benefits, taxation, parenthood issues, and divorce. Establishing whether a marriage is legal or not is essential when a common-law marriage is challenged in any of these areas.
Sources
West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 3. Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN:West Publishing, 1998.
User Comments Add a comment…