Ark. Code Ann. » Title 28 Chapter 09
Arkansas Code Annotated

Ark. Code Ann. § 28-9-210 (2026)

Posthumous heirs

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaArk. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
  1. Posthumous descendants of the intestate conceived before his or her death but born thereafter shall inherit in the same manner as if born in the lifetime of the intestate.
  2. However, no right of inheritance shall accrue to any person other than a lineal descendant of the intestate, unless such a person has been born at the time of the intestate's death.

History. Acts 1969, No. 303, § 12; A.S.A. 1947, § 61-142.

Research References

ALR.

Legal status of posthumously conceived child of decedent. 17 A.L.R.6th 593.

Case Notes

In Vitro Fertilization.

Child who was created as an embryo through in vitro fertilization during his parents' marriage, but implanted into his mother's womb after his father's death, could not inherit from the father under Arkansas intestacy law as a surviving child under this section; in order to inherit, the child had to have been conceived before the father's death. Finley v. Astrue, 372 Ark. 103, 270 S.W.3d 849 (2008).

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2008–2013 · leading case: Finley v. Astrue, 270 S.W.3d 849 (Ark. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Finley v. Astrue, 270 S.W.3d 849 (Ark. 2008). · cites it 6× “Ark. Code Ann. § 28-9-210 (a) (Repl. 2004) (emphasis added).”
Ankrom v. State, 152 So. 3d 397 (Ala. 2013). “§ 14-2108 (2005); Ark.Code Ann. § 28-9-210 (2004); Cal. Prob.”
Finley v. Astrue, 601 F. Supp. 2d 1092 (E.D. Ark. 2009). · cites it 6× “” While we could define that term, we find there is no need to do so, as we can definitively say that the General Assembly, in enacting Act 303 of 1969, § 12, now codified at Ark.Code Ann. § 28-9-210, did not intend for the statute to permit a child, created through in vitro…”
— Ark. Code Ann. § 28-9-210(a) — 2 cases
Finley v. Astrue, 270 S.W.3d 849 (Ark. 2008). “Ark. Code Ann. § 28-9-210 (a) (Repl. 2004) (emphasis added).”
Finley v. Astrue, 601 F. Supp. 2d 1092 (E.D. Ark. 2009). “” While we could define that term, we find there is no need to do so, as we can definitively say that the General Assembly, in enacting Act 303 of 1969, § 12, now codified at Ark.Code Ann. § 28-9-210, did not intend for the statute to permit a child, created through in vitro…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.