Appellant
Dennis Ray Tierce
Appellee
Sheila Ellis
Appellant's Claim
That the circuit court ruling that appellant was not the biological son of his father be reversed.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Borden M. Ray, Jr.
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Dan M. Gibson
Justices for the Court
Oscar W. Adams, Jr., Sonny Hornsby, Gorman Houston (writing for the court), Mark Kennedy, Janie L. Shores
Justices Dissenting
Kenneth I. Ingram, Alva Hugh Maddox
Place
Montgomery, Alabama
Date of Decision
10 September 1993
Decision
That the rule of repose, which dictates that claims must be initiated within20 years, applies to a illegitimacy claim, and that the lower court ruling therefore be reversed.
Significance
This decision upheld Alabama's rule of repose as absolute. This rule exists to prevent antiquated or outdated claims from being brought before the courts.Even if the facts of a case are undisputed and evidence shows justificationfor a claim, the rule of repose disallows any claim that has not been initiated within the specified time.
The state of Alabama's rule of repose does not permit legal actions to be brought to the courts if they have not been initiated within 20 years from the time when they could have begun. This ensures that the courts do not become clogged with "antiquated" claims many years after the matter in question has passed. The facts of the case and the merits of the argument do not matter if the issue has not been initiated within 20 years, the claim cannot be broughtto the courts.
The rule of repose is not the same thing as a statute of limitations. Different types of claims are governed by different statutes of limitations--in somestates, for example, the statute of limitations for paternity claims is 18 years. Other types of claims are regulated by varying statutes of limitations.But the rule of repose sets a limit of 20 years for all claims.
A Matter of Inheritance
In November of 1942, William Copeland Tierce and Irene Elizabeth Batchelder were married. From February of 1944 to December of 1945, William Tierce was posted overseas for military service. When he returned to the United States in1945, he discovered that his wife was six months pregnant. He filed for divorce on 2 February 1946 on grounds of adultery, and the divorce was finalized on 4 February 1946. The unborn child, Dennis Ray Tierce, was not made a partyto the divorce proceedings and the question of his paternity was not adjudicated. When Dennis Ray was born on 4 April 1946, his father was listed on the birth certificate as William Tierce.
William Tierce married again and had five children with his second wife. He died in December 1972, and his father, John C. Tierce, died in December 1989.In the list of heirs filed by John C. Tierce's executors, Dennis Ray Tierce was listed as William's son and an heir to John Tierce's estate. Sheila Ellis,one of William Tierce's daughters, then filed a declaratory action asking the court to find Dennis Ray Tierce not the son of William Tierce and thereforenot a legitimate heir. The trial court ruled that Dennis Ray was not William's biological son and therefore not an heir to the estate. Dennis Ray appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Alabama, which reversed the lower court's decision.
Presumption of Paternity
In its deliberations, the court stressed that Alabama statute 26-17-5(a)(1) states that a child born within 300 days after the termination of a marriage is presumed to be the child of the husband in that marriage. Dennis Ray Tiercewas born two months after the termination of the marriage. "[T]he presumption that the husband of the mother of a child born [or conceived] during marriage is the father of that child is often said to be one of the strongest presumptions know to the law," quoted Justice Houston in his opinion for the majority. The court further noted that the Alabama law required either clear and convincing evidence, or a judgment that established paternity by another man,before the presumption of paternity could be rebutted. Since the question ofDennis Ray Tierce's paternity had not been brought before the divorce court,the divorce did not destroy the usual presumption of paternity.
Because William Tierce had never brought the paternity matter to court and more than 20 years had elapsed, the court found that the rule of repose barredSheila Ellis's claim. "The rule of repose does not depend on evidence of prejudice, nor does it depend on any statute of limitations," the court determined. The court stressed that the rule of repose "`operates as an absolute bar to claims that are unasserted for 20 years.'" William Tierce--had he been alive--would not have been permitted to bring a claim to bastardize Dennis Ray after this time, and the rule of repose similarly prevented his daughter from bringing such a claim.
Dissent Urges Justices to Decide by Facts
Though five justices agreed in the decision to reverse the lower court's finding, Justices Maddox and Ingram dissented. Justice Maddox, in his dissentingopinion, argued that "the evidence clearly and convincingly shows that it isnaturally, physically, or scientifically impossible for the husband to be thefather." He argued that the legal issues in this case should be decided based on the facts, without the application of statutory or common law presumptions that he believed had been "exploded."
Impact
The Tierce decision confirmed that Alabama's rule of repose is absolute--claims that have not been initiated within 20 years may not be brought tothe courts. Because the rule of repose barred Sheila Ellis's claim refuting her father's paternity of Dennis Ray Tierce, Dennis Ray's status as the presumed son of William was unchanged. But the decision did not settle whether Dennis Ray Tierce was an heir to the estate. In a subsequent proceeding, the executors of William Tierce's estate filed for a declaratory judgment to determine whether the result in Tierce required that Dennis Ray be designatedan heir under the terms of William's will. The trial court found that becauseWilliam had never recognized Dennis Ray as his son and had specifically noted that his heirs should be his lineal, or biological, descendants, Dennis Rayshould not be considered an heir. Dennis Ray then appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court, which upheld the trial court's judgment. In this case, Tiercev. Gilliam (1994), the court noted that "Although the rule of repose prevents a direct challenge to Dennis Ray's paternity, his resulting legal status as a `lineal descendant' cannot be asserted to thwart the testator's intent."
Though the ruling in Tierce v. Ellis cited the presumption of paternity as one of the "strongest presumptions known to law," it did not establish this presumption as absolute. In an earlier case in the Alabama Court of Appeals, Ingram v. State of Alabama (1978), the court had been presented with facts similar to those in Tierce--a child was born while its parents were still married, but the husband claimed he was not the father. In thiscase, the court noted that the presumption of paternity is not conclusive andcan be overcome by proof of impotence or other conditions that would show paternity to have been impossible.
Related Cases
Statute of Limitations
Laws that stipulate a time limit under which a legal matter may be filed witha court are referred to as Statute of Limitation laws. These laws may be atthe state or federal level, depending upon the issue. The intent is to eliminate legal proceedings in civil and criminal matters where the evidence may have been destroyed, the facts of the case may have become muddied with the passage of time, or some of the parties to the case may be deceased.
Child custody issues usually are determined in a family court at the state level. Custody of children may be addressed until the individual reaches the "age of majority." This varies depending on state law. A child may also be considered emancipated, another term meaning a person is a legally an adult, whenhe or she can effectively support him/herself financially. The marriage of aperson also indicates emancipation. A court no longer has authority in custody issues after a person is considered emancipated.
Sources
West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 2. Minneapolis, MN: West Publishing, 1998.
Dennis Ray Tierce
Appellee
Sheila Ellis
Appellant's Claim
That the circuit court ruling that appellant was not the biological son of his father be reversed.
Chief Lawyer for Appellant
Borden M. Ray, Jr.
Chief Lawyer for Appellee
Dan M. Gibson
Justices for the Court
Oscar W. Adams, Jr., Sonny Hornsby, Gorman Houston (writing for the court), Mark Kennedy, Janie L. Shores
Justices Dissenting
Kenneth I. Ingram, Alva Hugh Maddox
Place
Montgomery, Alabama
Date of Decision
10 September 1993
Decision
That the rule of repose, which dictates that claims must be initiated within20 years, applies to a illegitimacy claim, and that the lower court ruling therefore be reversed.
Significance
This decision upheld Alabama's rule of repose as absolute. This rule exists to prevent antiquated or outdated claims from being brought before the courts.Even if the facts of a case are undisputed and evidence shows justificationfor a claim, the rule of repose disallows any claim that has not been initiated within the specified time.
The state of Alabama's rule of repose does not permit legal actions to be brought to the courts if they have not been initiated within 20 years from the time when they could have begun. This ensures that the courts do not become clogged with "antiquated" claims many years after the matter in question has passed. The facts of the case and the merits of the argument do not matter if the issue has not been initiated within 20 years, the claim cannot be broughtto the courts.
The rule of repose is not the same thing as a statute of limitations. Different types of claims are governed by different statutes of limitations--in somestates, for example, the statute of limitations for paternity claims is 18 years. Other types of claims are regulated by varying statutes of limitations.But the rule of repose sets a limit of 20 years for all claims.
A Matter of Inheritance
In November of 1942, William Copeland Tierce and Irene Elizabeth Batchelder were married. From February of 1944 to December of 1945, William Tierce was posted overseas for military service. When he returned to the United States in1945, he discovered that his wife was six months pregnant. He filed for divorce on 2 February 1946 on grounds of adultery, and the divorce was finalized on 4 February 1946. The unborn child, Dennis Ray Tierce, was not made a partyto the divorce proceedings and the question of his paternity was not adjudicated. When Dennis Ray was born on 4 April 1946, his father was listed on the birth certificate as William Tierce.
William Tierce married again and had five children with his second wife. He died in December 1972, and his father, John C. Tierce, died in December 1989.In the list of heirs filed by John C. Tierce's executors, Dennis Ray Tierce was listed as William's son and an heir to John Tierce's estate. Sheila Ellis,one of William Tierce's daughters, then filed a declaratory action asking the court to find Dennis Ray Tierce not the son of William Tierce and thereforenot a legitimate heir. The trial court ruled that Dennis Ray was not William's biological son and therefore not an heir to the estate. Dennis Ray appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Alabama, which reversed the lower court's decision.
Presumption of Paternity
In its deliberations, the court stressed that Alabama statute 26-17-5(a)(1) states that a child born within 300 days after the termination of a marriage is presumed to be the child of the husband in that marriage. Dennis Ray Tiercewas born two months after the termination of the marriage. "[T]he presumption that the husband of the mother of a child born [or conceived] during marriage is the father of that child is often said to be one of the strongest presumptions know to the law," quoted Justice Houston in his opinion for the majority. The court further noted that the Alabama law required either clear and convincing evidence, or a judgment that established paternity by another man,before the presumption of paternity could be rebutted. Since the question ofDennis Ray Tierce's paternity had not been brought before the divorce court,the divorce did not destroy the usual presumption of paternity.
Because William Tierce had never brought the paternity matter to court and more than 20 years had elapsed, the court found that the rule of repose barredSheila Ellis's claim. "The rule of repose does not depend on evidence of prejudice, nor does it depend on any statute of limitations," the court determined. The court stressed that the rule of repose "`operates as an absolute bar to claims that are unasserted for 20 years.'" William Tierce--had he been alive--would not have been permitted to bring a claim to bastardize Dennis Ray after this time, and the rule of repose similarly prevented his daughter from bringing such a claim.
Dissent Urges Justices to Decide by Facts
Though five justices agreed in the decision to reverse the lower court's finding, Justices Maddox and Ingram dissented. Justice Maddox, in his dissentingopinion, argued that "the evidence clearly and convincingly shows that it isnaturally, physically, or scientifically impossible for the husband to be thefather." He argued that the legal issues in this case should be decided based on the facts, without the application of statutory or common law presumptions that he believed had been "exploded."
Impact
The Tierce decision confirmed that Alabama's rule of repose is absolute--claims that have not been initiated within 20 years may not be brought tothe courts. Because the rule of repose barred Sheila Ellis's claim refuting her father's paternity of Dennis Ray Tierce, Dennis Ray's status as the presumed son of William was unchanged. But the decision did not settle whether Dennis Ray Tierce was an heir to the estate. In a subsequent proceeding, the executors of William Tierce's estate filed for a declaratory judgment to determine whether the result in Tierce required that Dennis Ray be designatedan heir under the terms of William's will. The trial court found that becauseWilliam had never recognized Dennis Ray as his son and had specifically noted that his heirs should be his lineal, or biological, descendants, Dennis Rayshould not be considered an heir. Dennis Ray then appealed to the Alabama Supreme Court, which upheld the trial court's judgment. In this case, Tiercev. Gilliam (1994), the court noted that "Although the rule of repose prevents a direct challenge to Dennis Ray's paternity, his resulting legal status as a `lineal descendant' cannot be asserted to thwart the testator's intent."
Though the ruling in Tierce v. Ellis cited the presumption of paternity as one of the "strongest presumptions known to law," it did not establish this presumption as absolute. In an earlier case in the Alabama Court of Appeals, Ingram v. State of Alabama (1978), the court had been presented with facts similar to those in Tierce--a child was born while its parents were still married, but the husband claimed he was not the father. In thiscase, the court noted that the presumption of paternity is not conclusive andcan be overcome by proof of impotence or other conditions that would show paternity to have been impossible.
Related Cases
- Jackson v. Jackson, 259 Ala 267, 268, 66 So.2d 745, 746 (1953).
- Ingram v. State of Alabama, 364 So. 2d 329 (1978).
- Leonard v. Leonard, 360 So.2d 710 (Ala. 1978).
- Tierce v. Gilliam, 652 So.2d 254 (1994).
Statute of Limitations
Laws that stipulate a time limit under which a legal matter may be filed witha court are referred to as Statute of Limitation laws. These laws may be atthe state or federal level, depending upon the issue. The intent is to eliminate legal proceedings in civil and criminal matters where the evidence may have been destroyed, the facts of the case may have become muddied with the passage of time, or some of the parties to the case may be deceased.
Child custody issues usually are determined in a family court at the state level. Custody of children may be addressed until the individual reaches the "age of majority." This varies depending on state law. A child may also be considered emancipated, another term meaning a person is a legally an adult, whenhe or she can effectively support him/herself financially. The marriage of aperson also indicates emancipation. A court no longer has authority in custody issues after a person is considered emancipated.
Sources
West's Encyclopedia of American Law, Vol. 2. Minneapolis, MN: West Publishing, 1998.
User Comments Add a comment…