Thanks to everyone for your input. Since this was a case of a person who died intestate it seems that inheritance law as it was applied in mid 1800s Ky is the issue. But in general spouse & children came first. Other blood relations were not included unless the person had no direct descendants. Correct so far? Either John Dugan was Barbara's son by a previous relationship ( married or not) or he was representing some one with a legal claim such as an adult child who lived too far away or minor children. ( If he was a foster -child , a nephew or something but raised in the family. The law would not recognize him. Would it be legally possible for the other children to just include him because they felt he deserved his share? That doesn't seem likely. None of them were wealthy but John Dugan seems to have been the most prosperous of the bunch) Anyone else who had a claim against the estate would have to go to court. Is that right? I have copies of documents concerning the settlement. The only minor children mentioned are those of Margaret who was deceased and they are mentioned in more than one place. One states clearly " the petition sets out title in Barbara Shadwicks heirs to 169 acres of land lying on Blackford Creek in Daviess County, to which the heirs of said Shadwick Eleven in number per (stirpes?) are entitled in distribution-the infants whose real and personal estate your commisioners were required to report are entitled to a third each of one eleventh of the whole tract." Barbara Shadwick had 10 known Shadwick children. Their names all appear in one or another of the documents and the Bivens children are all mentioned by name. The eleventh heir has to be John Dugan. There is no suggestion in any of these documents that he is acting for any one else nor do they single him out as special in any way. He is named first and I have noticed a tendency in these old documents to name children in birth order but I don't take that for granted.. So where does this leave me? I have never done any courthouse research in Nelson County. So many of the old records are published in books. How difficult would it be to find a possible paternity suit ca 1800? In the absence of any other evidence can I assume that he was Barbara's son since he appears to have been one of her heirs? Carol