Zulpo v. Blann
2013 Ark. App. 750
Ark. Ct. App.2013Background
- Freddy Blann died in 2004; a wrongful-death settlement was later proposed for claims arising from his death.
- Blann had married Maxie Kagenbein (stepmother of appellants Gary and Richard Zulpo) in 1974; appellants were teenagers at the time. After their parents’ divorce, appellants lived with their biological father and were supported by him until after age 18.
- Appellants (stepchildren) asserted Blann stood in loco parentis and sought a share of the wrongful-death settlement; Blann’s biological children (appellees) claimed the entire share as heirs.
- Carey & Danis, counsel for the decedent’s spouse, filed an interpleader and deposited $151,563.60 into the court registry, asking for a declaratory distribution under Arkansas law.
- The trial court held a hearing, found the evidence did not establish that Blann assumed parental role/responsibilities toward appellants, and ruled appellants were not beneficiaries under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-62-102.
- The court of appeals affirmed, concluding appellants failed to prove an in loco parentis relationship at any time during Blann’s life; thus they are not wrongful-death beneficiaries.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appellants are beneficiaries under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-62-102 as persons to whom decedent stood in loco parentis | Zulpo: Blann stood in loco parentis to them and thus they qualify for a share | Blann’s heirs: Relationship never rose to parental role/responsibilities; appellants lived with biological father and were supported by him until adulthood | Court: Affirmed—appellants did not prove Blann assumed parental role; not beneficiaries |
| Whether the 2001 amendment to § 16-62-102 allows an adult to stand in loco parentis to another adult | Zulpo: Amendment permits in loco parentis regardless of age, so adult stepchildren may qualify | Blann’s heirs: Not reached on merits because appellants failed to prove any in loco parentis relationship during Blann’s life | Court: Declined to decide; unnecessary because appellants failed to prove in loco parentis during decedent’s life |
Key Cases Cited
- Babb v. Matlock, 340 Ark. 263, 9 S.W.3d 508 (Ark. 2000) (strict statutory interpretation held in loco parentis did not extend past age of majority under pre-amendment statute)