Interim Decision #1470 

MATTER OF PALACIO 

In Visa Petition Proceedings 

A-14242599 

Decided by Board May 7, 1965 

Since the amended Judgment of Legitimation of beneficiary by petitioner, 

entered April 2T, 1905, by the Superior Court of the State of California 

under section 230, California Civil Code, decrees legitimation of the beneficiary—born out of wedlock June 2?, 1944 in the Philippines—as of December 

31, 1952, when he was 8 years old and was living with the petitioner in the 

Philippines, beneficiary comes within the definition of "child" in section 

101(b) (1) (Cl), Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, and, therefore, 

is eligible for nonquota status. (Note: See also, Matter of Palacio, Int. Dee. 

No. 1453, of which the alien in this .case is also the subject) 

The case comes forward pursuant to motion of counsel for the 

petitioner attaching an amended Judgment of Legitimation under 

section 920 of the California Civil Code and requesting that the 

visa petition be granted. 

The visa petition was filed by a native of the Philippines and a 

naturalized citizen of the United States, 60 years old, male, seeking 

nonquota status on. behalf of his unmarried child, born June VT, 1944, 

a native and citizen of the Philippines. The beneficiary was born 

out of .wedlock. The. petitioner married his present wife, Maria 

DaliSay Angeles, on May 6, 1963. 

In connection with the visa petition there was previously submitted 

a decree of the Superior Court of the State of California, City and 

County of San Francisco, declaring that the petitioner is the 

legitimate father from birth of the beneficiary as well as other 

included children, that the said minor children are legitimate children of the petitioner and that a valid and subsisting relationship 

of parent and child exists between petitioner and the said minor 

child. In view of the fact that it did not appear from the face of 

the judgment that this was a legitimate proceeding pursuant to 

section 230 of the California Civil Code, and may have been a. proceeding pursuant to section 231 of the California Civil -Code or 

183 
. . 

Interim Decision #1470 

section 255 of the Probate Code of California, and it further appearing that it was not established that the beneficiary had been received 

into the home of the petitioner, the denial of the visa petition was 

dismissed on April 1, 1965. Our order was without prejudice to a 

reopening upon submission. of a judgment by a California Court 

showing that the petitioner has been legitimated pursuant to section 

230 of the California Civil Code together with the date of such 

legitimation. 

There has now been submitted an Amended. Judgment of Legitimation under section 230 of the California Civil Code in the Superior 

Court of the State of California in and for the City and County 

of San Francisco, dated April 27, 1965, providing for a judgment in 

accordance with section 230 of the California Civil Code acknowledging the existence of the parental relationship between petitioner 

and the minor children named therein, including the beneficiary who 

was born on June 27, 1944. It was ordered adjudged and decreed 

that the petitioner is the legitimate father of the beneficiary and of 

the other minor children and the children are the legitimate children 

of the petitioner and that a valid and subsisting relationship of 

parent and child has existedbetween' petitioner and the said minor 

children since their birth. It was further ordered adjudged and 

decreed that the date of legitimation of the beneficiary is December 

31, 1952, when heneffciary was eight years of age. 

- Section 230 of the California Civil Code, which has been contrued as an out-and-out statute of legitimation, 1provides that the 

fitther of an illegitimate child, by publicly acknowledging it as his 

KM, receiving it as such with the consent of his wife, if he is 

married, into his family, and otherwise treating. it as if it were his 

legitimate child, thereby adopts it as such; and such child is thereupon deemed for all purposes legitimate from the time of its birth. 

The amended judgment legitimates the ehild as of December 31, 

1952 which is the date of the presumed death of Librada, the first 

wife of the petitioner -(actually, this marriage was dissolved by a 

California divorce decree on April 26, 1963). The petitioner resided 

in the Philippines in a husband and wife relationship with Nena de 

Silva, the natural mother of the beneficiary, from prior to the birth 

of the beneficiary on. June 27, 1944 and had five children by her, the 

last having teen born on December 19, 1957. The petitioner left the 

Philippines in 1957. According to the Amended audgment, the 

court evidently considered the relationship between the petitioner 

and Nena de Silva sufficient to base a finding of "receiving into the 

'Maladies v. De Sikee, 226 F.26 623, 632 (9th Oir., 1955), affirmed 351 U.S. 

570. rehearing denied 352 U.S. 907. 

184 
Interim Decision #1470 

family," even though it occurred in the Philippines, under the 

circumstances of the case.: 

Based upon the amended Jtidgment Decree that the dale of legitimation of the beneficiary is December 81, 1952, when the beneficiary 

was eight years old, the provisions of section 101(b) (1) (C) of the 

Immigration and Nationality Act, as amended, appear to be satisfied. Upon reconsideration, the visa petition will be approved. 

ORDER: It is ordered that the motion be granted and that the 

visa petition be approved for nomiuota status on behalf of the 

beneficiary. 

!Compare Matter of wow, Int. Dec. No. 1287; Matter of Tinsiey, Int. Dec. 

No. 1323. 

185