## Facts

- Dalip Singh Bir, a native of India, died intestate in San Joaquin County, California, in 1945.
- While domiciled in Punjab, British India, Bir married Harnam Kaur and Jiwi; polygamy and both marriages were lawful under the applicable local and personal law.
- Bir later emigrated to California and lived there until his death.
- Florence E. Boyes was appointed administratrix of Bir’s California estate.
- Harnam Kaur and Jiwi filed a joint petition to determine heirship, seeking recognition as Bir’s legal widows and an equal one-half share each.
- The trial court found both petitioners were legal spouses under Punjab law and that neither marriage had been dissolved, but found no satisfactory proof of which marriage occurred first.
- Relying on California policy against polygamy, the trial court concluded only the first wife could be recognized and continued the matter for proof of priority, effectively denying the requested judgment.
- The petitioners appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether California must recognize marriages valid where celebrated and where the parties were domiciled when the marriages are polygamous and would be invalid if contracted in California.
2. Whether, for intestate succession, California may recognize both spouses of a foreign polygamous marriage as lawful widows entitled to share in a California estate.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeal reversed.
- Because both marriages were valid under Punjab law and created a lawful spousal status, California would recognize both petitioners as widows for inheritance purposes.
- California’s policy against polygamy did not require refusing recognition of the foreign marital status in post-death distribution of property.
- The matter was remanded for distribution consistent with recognizing both petitioners as heirs.

## Legal Principles

- A marriage valid under the law of the place of celebration and the parties’ domicile is generally recognized, subject to limited public-policy exceptions.
- California’s public policy against polygamy primarily bars formation or maintenance of polygamous relationships within California; it does not automatically negate a foreign-created marital status for all purposes.
- Courts may give limited effect to a foreign polygamous marriage to protect property and succession rights when recognition does not encourage prohibited conduct within the forum.
- When foreign law treats multiple marriages as concurrently valid, a forum court should not rewrite that status by recognizing only one spouse absent a conflict-of-laws basis to invalidate the others.

## Conclusion

California recognized both women as lawful widows for intestate succession because their marriages were valid under Punjab law, and applying California’s anti-polygamy policy to deny inheritance would not further the state’s interest in preventing polygamous relationships within California.


In re Estate of Bir, 83 Cal. App. 2d 256, 188 P.2d 499 (Cal. Ct. App. 1948)