Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Levy v. Louisiana Ex Rel. Charity Hospital
Citations: 20 L. Ed. 2d 436; 88 S. Ct. 1509; 391 U.S. 68; 1968 U.S. LEXIS 1629Docket: 508
Court: Supreme Court of the United States; October 14, 1968; Federal Supreme Court; Federal Appellate Court
The case involves Thelma Levy, representing five illegitimate children, who sought damages under Louisiana law for the wrongful death of their mother, Louise Levy. The suit aimed to recover for the children's loss of their mother and for the mother's own pain and suffering prior to her death. The initial court dismissed the case, interpreting the term "child" in the relevant statute as referring only to legitimate children. This interpretation was upheld by the Court of Appeal, which justified the exclusion of illegitimate children from recovery on moral grounds related to discouraging out-of-wedlock births. The Supreme Court of Louisiana subsequently denied certiorari. The Supreme Court took up the appeal, asserting that illegitimate children are recognized as "persons" under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court emphasized that while states have the authority to create classifications, they cannot engage in invidious discrimination against specific classes of people. The ruling highlighted the importance of rationality in classifications and questioned whether arbitrary distinctions, such as denying recovery based on the legitimacy of a child's birth, could be justified. The Court noted that even long-standing traditions and historical practices could be overturned if they violate fundamental civil rights. The document asserts that the intimate relationship between a child and his mother warrants equal protection under the law, regardless of the child's legitimacy. It questions the rationale behind allowing tortfeasors to evade accountability simply because a child is born out of wedlock. The text argues that illegitimate children, who bear the same civic responsibilities as legitimate citizens, should not be denied rights that correspond to their status as dependents of their mothers. It emphasizes that legitimacy has no bearing on the nature of the harm inflicted on the mother or the suffering experienced by the child upon her death. The discrimination against illegitimate children is deemed unjust, as their circumstances are not relevant to the wrongful act. The text also outlines the legal framework for the right to recover damages following a wrongful death, highlighting the inheritance of this right by various relatives, including illegitimate children. It references Louisiana law, which mandates parental support for illegitimate children and notes relevant case law affirming their rights to compensation. The mention of the State of Louisiana's dismissal from the action and the indefinite continuation of exceptions related to Charity Hospital is noted, along with a quotation from Shakespeare questioning the stigma of illegitimacy.