Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Why Californians May Need to Thank Rock Hudson's Partner, Marc Christian

You should thank Marc Christian twice! First for setting a precedent for future lawsuits for those who were exposed to AIDS unknowingly from a partner who knew that they were infected and a second time after death!

The California Court of Appeal’s positive ruling on inheritance rights for same-sex partners stands to set an influential precedent — and it involves a famous name from a past court case.

The court ruled that Brent Beckwith could proceed with his lawsuit against Susan Dahl, the sister of his late partner, Marc Christian MacGinnis. He claims Dahl prevented MacGinnis, who died in 2009, from signing a will giving Beckwith a share of MacGinnis’s estate.

While many other states have recognized the right to sue for what’s known as “intentional interference with expectation of inheritance,” California is the first to do so in a case involving same-sex partners, says Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which filed a brief supporting Beckwith. The ruling came even though the men, together for 10 years, were not married or registered domestic partners.

If MacGinnis’s name sounds familiar, it’s because he was once the partner of movie star Rock Hudson. After Hudson died of AIDS complications in 1985, MacGinnis, known publicly as simply Marc Christian, sued the actor’s estate, claiming Hudson had knowingly exposed him to HIV. MacGinnis tested negative but won a multimillion-dollar settlement.

That case was sensational, but the newer one will likely have more important legal implications. Beckwith says MacGinnis, while hospitalized shortly before his death, asked him to print out a will from his computer, splitting his estate between Beckwith and Dahl, and bring it to him to sign. According to Beckwith’s suit, Dahl thwarted that plan and promised to set up a trust instead, which she did not do. The Los Angeles Superior Court ruled in a probate action that MacGinnis had died without a will and awarded the entire estate to Dahl.

Beckwith sued Dahl in Orange County Superior Court, which dismissed the suit and said the appeals court had to decide whether to recognize the claim. The appeals court did recognize it and sent the case back to Orange County to see if the evidence supports him. So while Beckwith’s case remains open, it has been established that unmarried partners have a right to pursue such actions. “If you’re in a relationship with someone and have a reasonable expectation that they’re going to leave their estate to you, you can go to court and have them look at the facts,” Minter says. While the court’s ruling technically affects only California, it’s a state that others often look to as a leader in legal matters. “California is very influential with other states,” Minter says.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 10June 8, 2021 8:56 PM

A recent California Court of Appeal case attempts to remedy one potential injury which could result from this inequality. Brent Beckwith is the longtime partner of Marc Christian MacGinnis.

Mr. MacGinnis had an estate worth approximately $1,000,000. Mr. MacGinnis prepared (but did not sign) a will leaving half of his estate to Mr. Beckwith and the remaining half to his sister, Susan Dahl. Both Mr. Beckwith and Ms. Dahl knew about the draft will. When Mr. MacGinnis was admitted to the hospital for lung surgery, he asked Mr. Beckwith to bring his will to his hospital room so that he could sign it. Mr. Beckwith could not find the will, so Mr. MacGinnis asked him to create a new will with the same provisions.

Mr. Beckwith did so, emailing a copy to Ms. Dahl. Following Mr. Beckwith’s email, Mr. Beckwith and Ms. Dahl spoke on the telephone. Prior to their conversation, Mr. MacGinnis’ doctors had informed Ms. Dahl that Mr. MacGinnis’ surgery was high-risk and potentially fatal. Under medical privacy regulations, doctors could not share this information with Mr. Beckwith because California law did not recognize him as Mr. MacGinnis’ family member.

Ms. Dahl also did not inform Mr. Beckwith of the risks that Mr. MacGinnis faced. Instead, she instructed Mr. Beckwith that a will was not necessary, and told him that she would arrange for attorneys to prepare a living trust for Mr. MacGinnis following his surgery. However, as doctors feared, Mr. MacGinnis’ surgery was not successful.

Mr. MacGinnis was placed on life support and passed away less than one week later. Mr. MacGinnis died intestate, i.e., without an executed will or trust in place. Ms. Dahl then petitioned for the intestate probate of Mr. MacGinnis’ estate asserting that she was Mr. MacGinnis’ sole surviving heir. Mr. Beckwith, Mr. MacGinnis’ longtime partner and the intended 50% beneficiary of his estate, was to be left empty-handed.

Mr. Beckwith filed a complaint alleging, among other claims, that Ms. Dahl had intentionally interfered with his expected inheritance rights. The trial court dismissed his claim on the ground that this tort did not exist under California law. In its recent decision, Beckwith v. Dahl (2012) 205 Cal. App. 4th 1039, the California Court of Appeal reversed, for the first time officially recognizing intentional interference with an expected inheritance (“IIEI”) as a tort under California law. In so doing, California joined 25 other states which recognize the tort.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 1January 1, 2021 4:20 PM

Who is the demented troll who keeps posting about Marc FUCKING Christian?

by Anonymousreply 2January 1, 2021 4:22 PM

and an article that's almost 9 years old, at that

by Anonymousreply 3January 1, 2021 4:24 PM

Did he get his 50%?

by Anonymousreply 4January 1, 2021 4:26 PM

R4 I'm curious to know about that.

by Anonymousreply 5January 1, 2021 4:30 PM

R2 Me!

by Anonymousreply 6January 1, 2021 4:30 PM

R4 & R5 - He (Marc) was initially awarded over $20+ million in the lawsuit, but it was appealed and his award was reduced to $5.0 million. It was appealed again, and he was about to get nothing at all, and settled for an undisclosed sum that is believed to be around $1.5 million. The basis for the award had nothing to do with the alleged exposure to HIV, but due to his time & commitment to the relationship (which in itself, is a laugh).

Take a moment to read "All That Heaven Allows" and you'll see that the entire basis for his lawsuit was fraudulent. He actually had some evidence of Rock's diagnosis before Rock himself knew it.

by Anonymousreply 7June 8, 2021 8:34 PM

R7 Stop spreading false stories initiated by Rock Hudson's shameless camp.

by Anonymousreply 8June 8, 2021 8:37 PM

What year is this.! 2021 not 1985

by Anonymousreply 9June 8, 2021 8:38 PM

R9 Hahaaaaaaaaaaa

by Anonymousreply 10June 8, 2021 8:56 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!