GLBT Issue: IF the Florida court upholds that Stern is Anna Nicole Smith's

[Horse with no Name]

legal next of kin even though they aren't married...is that good news for the GLBT community?
Let me explain.
If Stern/Smith aren't married, there shouldn't be any question here. Her mother would be the legal next of kin.
However, if the court takes that into consideration and makes him legal next of kin anyway, wouldn't that open up precedent for gay and lesbian couples who aren't legally married to be named legal next-of-kin?

[SoCalDem]

1. I doubt they will.. You're talking about FLORIDA, here..

Technically , if it was a commitment ceremony, and not a legally binding marriage, it won;t hold up anywhere.

I wish they would hurry up and do something.. and bury that poor woman, and find a decent home for her baby:grr:

reminds me of hyenas feasting on a carcass..:grr:

[provis99]

2. interesting question,

this whole sordid saga of excess might actually have some benefits if the Stern character is named next of kin? While I would applaud if it meant GLBT partners had indirectly gained a stronger claim on fuller legal next-of-kin rights, it would be sort of an odd way to get it. Oh well, whatever works, I guess.

[justiceischeap]

3. There was one case in Florida where a non-blood lesbian

Was given custody of her partners' child after her partner died. At first the child were given to her grandparents but on appeal the child was given back to the girls' mother.

That case could be used as a precedent in this case. It will be interesting to see what happens and it will be interesting to see who the real daddy is. Only for the fact that all this nonsense will be dumped by the MSM and we can get on to more important topics.

[Ms. Toad]

4. Whether he is legal next of kin

will depend on whether the state in which they lived recognizes common law marriages or not. Some do (or used to, the last time I checked). If a state recognized common law marriage and a couple satisfies all of the requirements they are just as married as if they used the ceremonial process. Here's a link to the states which do (although I can't vouch for its accuracy, other than Ohio)
http://www.nolo.com/article.cfm/pg/2/objectId/709FAEE4-ABEA-4E17-BA34836388313A3C/catId/697DBAFE-20FF-467A-9E9395985EE7E825/118/304/192/FAQ/

Ohio did until 10/10/1991. All you had to do was satisfy the following requirements: be legally eligible for marriage (which cuts out same gender couples), agree to be married, live together as married, hold out to the public that you were married, and be regarded in the community as married. Any couple which did that in Ohio prior to 10/10/1991 is still legally married - and would need to go through a divorce to terminate the marriage.

Different states have/had different requirements.