237 So. 3d 681
Miss.2017Background
- Travis Weems was alleged to be the natural father of Kevin Earl Moore; DHS filed paternity actions in 2007 (dismissed for nonservice) and 2008; a 2009 chancery judgment found Travis to be Kevin's father after Travis refused genetic testing and had voluntarily acknowledged paternity on a birth certificate.
- In February 2011 the Lincoln County Chancery Court terminated Travis’s parental rights; the written order also (erroneously, the court later found) included language terminating Kevin’s right to inherit from Travis.
- Travis died in July 2014; the chancery clerk obtained letters of administration and initiated heirship proceedings; Tabitha Moore (Kevin’s mother) testified and the court adjudicated Kevin an heir based on the 2009 paternity judgment.
- In May 2015 the guardian/administrator moved to revise the February 2011 termination order to remove the disinheritance language; the chancery court struck the inheritance language in October 2015, citing a clerical mistake and invoking Rule 60(a) (later analyzed under Rule 60(b)).
- Dauwanna Mitchell (Travis’s mother) appealed, arguing (1) the 2009 paternity adjudication was invalid because the 2007 dismissal left the second complaint void, and (2) the chancery court improperly revised the 2011 termination order (a substantive change) under Rule 60(a)/(b).
- The Mississippi Supreme Court affirmed the heirship adjudication, upheld the court’s correction of the 2011 order on equitable Rule 60(b)(6) grounds, and concluded Kevin’s inheritance rights should be preserved.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Mitchell) | Defendant's Argument (Chancery/Guardian/Clerk) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of 2009 paternity adjudication | Second complaint was void because initial 2007 complaint was dismissed; same cause number shows same action | The 2007 dismissal was without prejudice; DHS properly filed a new complaint in 2008; refusal to undergo genetic testing and birth-certificate acknowledgment support paternity finding | Court held 2009 adjudication valid; dismissal without prejudice did not bar the new action and statutory presumption from refusing testing supported paternity finding |
| Correction of 2011 termination order that included disinheritance language | Striking inheritance language was a substantive change beyond Rule 60(a); Rule 60(b) relief (if any) must meet time limits and be sought within a reasonable time — amendment after 4+ years is untimely and prejudices Mitchell | Chancery court accidentally included the disinheritance clause; correction protects a minor’s rights; equitable Rule 60(b)(6) relief is available because child was disabled by minority and correction serves substantial justice | Court held the chancery court did not abuse discretion removing the inheritance language; Rule 60(a) was inappropriate for a substantial change but relief under Rule 60(b)(6) was warranted given the minor’s disability and equity considerations |
| Effect of disinheritance language on heirship after death | The 2011 judgment terminated Kevin's right to inherit and therefore should bar heirship | The 2011 disinheritance language was unintended; statutory and precedential protections favor preserving an adopted/illegitimate child’s inheritance absent clear, intentional termination | Court concluded there was no legitimate basis to have terminated Kevin’s inheritance in 2011; corrected judgment did not bar Kevin’s heirship |
| Timeliness and prejudice inquiry for Rule 60(b)(6) relief | Four-year delay in seeking correction is unreasonable; Mitchell prejudiced as it affects her inheritance expectations | Kevin (the real movant) was a minor and unable to protect his rights; guardian moved promptly once the error was raised in administration proceedings; denying relief would unduly harm the child | Court weighed prejudice, movant’s disability, and equities and found relief within a reasonable time here; denial would unfairly harm the minor, so relief proper |
Key Cases Cited
- Norton v. Norton, 742 So.2d 126 (Miss. 1999) (standards for appellate review of chancery-court factual findings)
- Smith v. Dorsey, 599 So.2d 529 (Miss. 1992) (questions of law reviewed de novo)
- Stringfellow v. Stringfellow, 451 So.2d 219 (Miss. 1984) (treatment of Rule 60 and federal interpretations)
- Trimble v. Gordon, 430 U.S. 762 (U.S. 1977) (equal protection prohibits summary disinheritance of illegitimate children)
- Alack v. Phelps, 230 So.2d 789 (Miss. 1970) (adoption does not terminate child's right to inherit from natural parents)
- Kimble v. Estate of Kimble, 447 So.2d 1278 (Miss. 1984) (statutory remedial scheme for illegitimates to assert inheritance claims)
- Kidd v. Estate of Kidd, 435 So.2d 632 (Miss. 1983) (heirship causes of action accrue at decedent's death)