901 N.W.2d 234
Minn. Ct. App.2017Background
- Prince Rogers Nelson died intestate in 2016; his birth certificate lists Mattie Della Shaw and John L. Nelson as his parents, and he was born during their marriage.
- Tyka Nelson petitioned and was appointed special administrator; the court authorized genetic testing and adopted a protocol requiring affidavits and questionnaires from putative heirs.
- Appellants (Gresham parties and Leverette) claimed to be half‑siblings through men other than John L. Nelson and sought genetic testing to establish heirship.
- The special administrator and district court concluded John L. Nelson is the presumed genetic father under the Parentage Act and, under the probate code definition of “genetic father,” only the presumed father can be the decedent’s genetic father.
- The district court excluded appellants as heirs as a matter of law because they did not and could not rebut the paternity presumption within the Parentage Act’s constraints; appellants appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Parentage Act’s paternity presumption can be applied to bar appellants from proving heirship under the Probate Code | Appellants: probate law permits establishing parentage by clear-and-convincing evidence (Palmer) so Parentage Act is not exclusive | Respondent: statutory amendments make the Parentage Act presumption controlling; probate code defines "genetic father" as only the man established under the presumption | Court: Affirmed — where paternity is established under the Parentage Act, that man is the sole "genetic father" for intestate succession, so appellants are not heirs |
| Whether request for genetic testing and the court’s protocol violated equal protection | Appellants: protocol and irrebuttable presumption discriminate against nonmarital children and their descendants | Respondent: protocol follows statutory scheme; no equal-protection ruling below | Court: Equal-protection claim forfeited (not raised timely below); not reached on merits |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Estate of Palmer, 658 N.W.2d 197 (Minn. 2003) (held Parentage Act was not the exclusive means to establish paternity under pre‑amendment probate law)
- In re Estate of Martignacco, 689 N.W.2d 262 (Minn. App. 2004) (applied Palmer to allow non‑Parentage Act proof of parentage under prior statute)
- In re Estate of Jotham, 722 N.W.2d 447 (Minn. 2006) (applied Parentage Act statute of limitations where a party challenged paternity of a presumed child)