## Facts

- Terrold Bean was placed, at about age two, in the home of Mr. and Mrs. Ford under child-welfare supervision and lived with them throughout his childhood.
- The Fords never completed a statutory adoption of Bean.
- While she was alive, Mrs. Ford told a friend that she and Mr. Ford wanted to adopt Bean but believed they could not and feared Bean might be removed and placed elsewhere during an adoption effort.
- After Mrs. Ford died, Bean remained close to Mr. Ford until Mr. Ford’s death.
- Mr. Ford died intestate and was survived by a niece and a nephew, who petitioned in probate to determine distribution of his estate.
- Bean asserted an interest in the estate, claiming he should inherit as Mr. Ford’s child under California Probate Code § 6454 and, separately, under the doctrine of equitable adoption preserved by Probate Code § 6455.
- The superior court rejected Bean’s claims, finding insufficient evidence that Mr. Ford intended (or agreed) to adopt Bean.
- The Court of Appeal affirmed, and Bean sought review in the California Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether Bean qualified to inherit as Mr. Ford’s child under Probate Code § 6454, including whether there was a “legal barrier” that prevented adoption.
2. Whether Probate Code §§ 6454–6455 allowed Bean to inherit under equitable adoption, and if so, whether Bean proved equitable adoption by clear and convincing evidence.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court held Bean did not qualify under Probate Code § 6454 because he did not prove an objective “legal barrier” to adoption; mistaken beliefs or fears about the process did not satisfy the statute.
- The court held that § 6455 preserves equitable adoption as a separate doctrine, but Bean failed to establish equitable adoption because the record did not show, by clear and convincing evidence, an agreement or clear intent by Mr. Ford to adopt Bean.
- The judgment for the niece and nephew was affirmed.

## Legal Principles

- Probate Code § 6454 permits a child raised by a nonbiological caregiver (or stepparent) to inherit as a “child” for intestate succession only if the relationship began while the child was a minor, continued through the joint lifetimes, and adoption was blocked by an actual legal impediment.
- A “legal barrier” under § 6454 requires an objective legal obstacle to adoption; uncertainty, misinformation, or apprehension about possible consequences of seeking adoption is not enough.
- Probate Code § 6455 confirms that § 6454 does not abolish or narrow equitable adoption; equitable adoption remains available in proper cases.
- Equitable adoption is an exceptional remedy requiring clear and convincing proof of an agreement to adopt or conduct demonstrating a definite intent to adopt; a long-term parent–child relationship, standing alone, does not establish equitable adoption.

## Conclusion

Because Bean could not show an objective legal impediment preventing adoption under Probate Code § 6454 and could not prove by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Ford agreed or clearly intended to adopt him for purposes of equitable adoption, Bean was not treated as Mr. Ford’s child for intestate succession, and the estate was distributed to Mr. Ford’s blood relatives.


Bean v. Ford, 32 Cal. 4th 160 (2004)