395
Review of the Year 2019 in Family Law:
Case Digests
Abortion
Colorado. Norton v. Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, Inc., 409 P.3d 331
(Colo. 2018). The court held that the state did not violate Coloradoβs constitutional
provision, Β§ 50, prohibiting the use of public funds to pay for the performance of
any induced abortion. Further, the state does not violate this provision by paying
or reimbursing an entity for services for non-abortion medical servicesβeven
if the provider uses its income to subsidize operations of a facility that offers
abortion services.
Iowa. Planned Parenthood of the Heartland v. Reynolds ex rel. State, 915 N.W.2d
206 (Iowa 2018). Iowa statute requiring that a woman wait a mandatory seventy-
two hours to receive an abortion after initial consultation was challenged by health
care provider. The supreme court held the statute required strict scrutiny review
because it affected a fundamental right (right to abortion) and, as a result, violated
substantive due process under the Iowa Constitution and equal protection.
Adoption
Alaska. ξ§ξξξξξΆξξξξξξ§ξξξΆξξξξξξ«ξξξξξξξξξΆξξξξ ξΆξξξξξξξ²ξξΏξξξξξξξ¦ξξξξξξξΆξξξξ, 420 P.3d
1175 (Alaska 2018). Several months after consenting to the adoption of his
children, Father motioned to withdraw his consent. The superior court denied
the motion, determining that withdrawal of Fatherβs consent would not be in
the childrenβs best interest. Father appealed. The appeals court upheld the lower
ξξξξξξΆξξξξξξξξξξξξξΏξξξξξξξξξξΏξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ
court.
Matter of Adoption of E.H., 431 P.3d 1190 (Alaska 2018). Maternal grandparents
and foster parents entered into a settlement agreement regarding children,
which was incorporated into foster parentsβ adoption decree. The grandparents
moved to enforce the settlement agreement and vacate the adoption. Holding
that the vacation of the adoption decree was warranted, the court noted that the
Published in Family Law Quarterly, Volume 53, Number 4, Winter 2020. Β© 2020 American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof
may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.
396 Family Law Quarterly, Volume 53, Number 4, Winter 2020
ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξΆξξξΏξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξΆξ
misrepresentation of their intent to abide by the agreementβs visitation provisions.
Hawaii. W.N. v. S.M., 424 P.3d 483 (Haw. 2018). Both of the parties entered into
a relationship in 2009 and decided to bring one of their granddaughters into the
family and raise her as their own daughter. One of the parents legally adopted
the child, and both of them assumed joint custody of the child. Upon dissolution
of the relationship, the parent who legally adopted the child sought to take
full custody. The court held that an evidentiary hearing is required on remand,
statements by the child in visitation reports were not hearsay, and the exclusion
of the psychologistβs progress notes about the former partner constituted abuse.
Indiana. E.B.F. v. D.F., 93 N.E.3d 759 (Ind. 2018). Motherβs consent was required
for Stepmother to adopt a minor child. Mother had shared legal custody of her
child, who primarily lived with his father and stepmother. (Child grew up with
Mother but moved to Fatherβs after Mother became unemployed, drug dependent,
and in an abusive relationship.) During year where Mother recovered from drug
abuse, gained employment, and found housing, she had no contact with her child.
ξ²ξξξ ξξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξξξ ξξξξξ ξξξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξ ξΆξξξξξξξξξξ ξΏξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξ
of the child without Motherβs consent due to a prerequisite year of no-contact
requirement. The court found that while the prerequisite was met, Motherβs
consent was required because her willingness to distance herself while recovering
ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξξξξξ
ξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξ ξξξξξξΏξξ
ξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξ
communicate, and because Father and Stepmother blocked Motherβs attempts to
communicate with her son.
Kansas. In re Adoption of C.L., 427 P.3d 395 (Kan. 2018). In 2016, Mother found
out she was pregnant and gave birth on the same day. Mother opted to put the
ξ
ξξ
ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξΏξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ°ξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξξ
her parental rights to the baby. The baby was placed with prospective adoptive
parents, and a social work supervisor called the man believed to be the father of
the baby to convince him to relinquish his parental rights as well. Father asked
to meet the baby and was told by the social work supervisor that any meetings
ξξξξξξξ
ξξ ξξξ ξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξ·ξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξΏξξξξ ξξξ
adoption petition and requested termination of Fatherβs parental rights one day
ξ
ξξξξξξξ©ξξξξξξξΏξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξ©ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ
action. The court asked Father to take a paternity test, and Father was determined
to be the father. Father was then asked why he had not attempted to support or
contact his child despite not knowing about the pregnancy, not knowing the
identity of the prospective adoptive parents, and not being informed of any way
he could support or contact the child through the adoption agency. The lower
court ultimately decided Fatherβs rights should be terminated because he failed
to support or communicate with his child, and the adoption was processed. The
Kansas Supreme Court reversed and remanded the decision because Father asked
the social work supervisor about seeing the baby and prepared at home to support
Published in Family Law Quarterly, Volume 53, Number 4, Winter 2020. Β© 2020 American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof
may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.
Case Digests 397
the child. Father had also attempted to establish paternity but was preempted from
ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξΏξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξΏξξξξξξξ
petition he was not served with until three days before trial. The Kansas Supreme
Court determined Fatherβs actions did not show he did not attempt to support or
contact his child.
Maine. Adoption of Paisley, 178 A.3d 1228 (Me. 2018). Paisley was placed with a
ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξΏξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξΊξξξξξξξξξξΏξξξξξξξ
became unavailable, Paisley became available for adoption. The foster parents
ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξ ξξξ ξξξξ ξξξ ξ³ξξξξξξξΆξξξξξ
ξξξξξξ ξΏξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξ
for adoption. The foster parents were granted the adoption of Paisley, and the
adoptive parents appealed. At issue was the whether the Department acted
reasonably by not consenting to the foster parents adopting Paisley and whether
the court abused its discretion in allowing expert witness testimony. The court
ξξξΏξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξ
ξξξξξξξξξξ
was in Paisleyβs best interests.
Adoption of Parker, 185 A.3d 51 (Me. 2018). Parkerβs biological parents had
their parental rights terminated. Parkerβs paternal grandmother, Parkerβs maternal
ξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξ ξ³ξξξξξξΆξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξξ ξΏξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξ
petitions for adoption. Adoption was granted to Parkerβs paternal grandmother
and her partner even though the partner had not petitioned for adoption. The
court vacated the adoption order because the adoption was granted jointly to the
ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξΏξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ
adoption. Because the adoption was granted jointly, it could not be severed in
favor of the paternal grandmother and was remanded.
Mississippi. In re Adoption of D.D.H., No. 2016-CA-01530-SCT, 2018 WL
372381 (Miss. Jan. 11, 2018). Mother and putative father petitioned for the
adoption of child by putative father. In the same petition, Mother and putative
father also sought to allow childβs biological mother to retain parental rights. The
lower court denied the petition on the grounds that putative father failed to join
his wife in the petition as required by statute. The lower court also stated that the
request that motherβs rights not be terminated was inconsistent with the purpose
ξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξ²ξξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξΏξξξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξξξξξ ξξξξ ξξξξξξξξξ
father was required to join his wife in the petition for adoption, but found that
the statute did permit adoption of the child while the biological mother retained
parental rights. The case was remanded with instructions to (1) enable the putative
fatherβs wife to join the petition and (2) perform a best interest analysis regarding
the adoption.
Nevada. Mulkern v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Ct. ex rel. Cty. of Clark, 429 P.3d 277
(Nev. 2018). A baby was born and subsequently placed into foster care. The infant
had an older half-sister who had been adopted. The adoptive mother of the infantβs
older half-sister sought adoptive placement, as did the infantβs current foster
parents. There exists a rebuttable presumption that a dependent childβs placement
Published in Family Law Quarterly, Volume 53, Number 4, Winter 2020. Β© 2020 American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof
may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.
