## Facts

- Cathy Yvonne Stone alleged she was the natural daughter of Hank Williams, Sr. and claimed rights tied to his compositions.
- Stone was placed with Hank Williams Sr.’s mother as an infant; after her death, Stone became a ward of the state and was later adopted by the Deuprees.
- Alabama estate proceedings in 1967–1968 addressed potential heirs; a guardian ad litem located Stone and advocated for her.
- The Alabama court found Hank Williams Sr. was Stone’s natural father but ruled she was not an heir, declaring Hank Williams, Jr. the sole heir, effectively excluding Stone from estate interests and related royalties.
- Stone learned of the estate proceedings in 1973 when she turned 21; her adoptive parents discouraged further inquiry for years, and she did not file suit until 1985.
- In 1985, Stone sued in the Southern District of New York seeking a share of copyright renewal rights in Hank Williams Sr.’s songs against Williams family members and music publishing entities involved in copyright transactions.
- After the federal case was dismissed on laches and initially affirmed on appeal, the Alabama Supreme Court later set aside the earlier Alabama orders, found intentional and fraudulent concealment of Stone’s identity and rights, and declared her a lawful heir.

## Issues

1. Whether laches barred Stone’s federal copyright renewal claims given her delay in filing suit and alleged prejudice from intervening copyright transactions.
2. What effect a subsequent state supreme court decision—recognizing Stone as an heir and finding intentional, fraudulent concealment—had on the laches analysis and the prior federal affirmance.
3. Whether the changed factual and legal predicates warranted vacating the earlier appellate decision and remanding for merits proceedings.

## Decision

- The Second Circuit granted Stone’s petition for rehearing and vacated its prior decision affirming dismissal.
- The court reversed the district court’s summary judgment that had dismissed the complaint on laches.
- The court remanded for further proceedings on the merits of Stone’s copyright claims.

## Legal Principles

- Laches requires unreasonable, inexcusable delay and prejudice; summary judgment is improper where intervening findings raise material questions about the excuse for delay.
- Equitable defenses such as laches are constrained by the “clean hands” principle; concealment or related misconduct that contributes to a plaintiff’s ignorance or delay can defeat or limit laches.
- State-law determinations of heirship and related factual findings can be authoritative in federal litigation when heir status is relevant to ownership of federal copyright renewal rights.
- An appellate court may reconsider and vacate a prior judgment on rehearing when a subsequent, material state-court decision substantially alters the premises of the earlier ruling.

## Conclusion

Because a later state supreme court decision found that Stone’s heirship and rights had been intentionally and fraudulently concealed and declared her a lawful heir, the Second Circuit held that laches could not support summary judgment on the existing record, vacated its earlier affirmance, and remanded for merits litigation.


Stone v. Williams (Stone II), 891 F.2d 401 (2d Cir. 1989)