Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Parham v. Hughes

Supreme Court of the United States · 1979 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawEqual ProtectionDue ProcessIllegitimacyGender ClassificationsWrongful DeathEqual Protection ClauseDue Process Clause

Facts

Georgia law allowed the mother of an illegitimate child to sue for the child's wrongful death, and allowed the father to sue only if he had legitimated the child and there was no mother. The appellant was the biological father of a minor child killed in an automobile collision; the child's mother was also killed, the parents had never married, and the appellant had not legitimated the child under Georgia law. The appellant had signed the child's birth certificate, contributed to support, the child bore his name, and he visited regularly. After the child's death, the appellant sued for wrongful death, while the child's maternal grandmother, as administratrix, also brought a wrongful-death suit.

Issue

Whether Georgia's statutory scheme violates the Equal Protection or Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by denying the father of an illegitimate child who has not legitimated the child the right to sue for the child's wrongful death.

Rule

A statutory classification that does not invidiously discriminate against a suspect or quasi-suspect class is entitled to a presumption of validity and will be upheld under the Equal Protection Clause unless it bears no rational relationship to a permissible state objective. A State may rationally condition a biological father's right to sue for the wrongful death of his illegitimate child on prior legitimation where that requirement serves the State's interest in avoiding difficult and potentially fraudulent paternity claims.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Ohio, a wrongful-death statute allows the mother of a nonmarital child to sue for the child's death. A biological father may sue only if, before the child's death, he completed a court filing that formally legitimated the child under state law. After a bus accident in Cleveland kills both the child and the mother, Daniel Mercer sues, alleging he can prove paternity through DNA, support records, and school forms even though he never filed for legitimation.

How should a court evaluate Daniel's equal protection challenge under the majority's approach?

Explanation. The majority first asks whether the classification is invidiously discriminatory. A statute conditioning a biological father's wrongful-death action on prior legitimation is not treated as punishing the child for illegitimacy and is not treated as resting on overbroad stereotypes about men and women. Absent invidious discrimination, the statute receives a presumption of validity and is upheld if rationally related to a permissible state objective, such as avoiding difficult or fraudulent paternity claims.