A.B. v. Jo.D., 938 N.E.2d 666

Mother, who was incarcerated, gave birth to Child and Co. guardian N.E. assisted at birth.
Paternal Grandparents sought to adopt Child and mailed notices to N.E. and Mother; later proceedings modified custody with Grandparents gaining physical custody.
N.E. adopted Mother in 2005, becoming Child's adoptive grandmother.
In 2007-2008, Paternal Grandparents filed a new adoption petition in Probate Division without giving N.E. notice and used publication for Mother’s notice.
Mother and N.E. moved to set aside the decree under Trial Rule 60(B); court denied, then Court of Appeals affirmed.
This Court vacated the appellate decision and addressed whether Mother received proper notice under due process requirements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether notice by publication satisfied due process	Mother; reliance on publication was inadequate	Paternal Grandparents; publication sufficient where address unknown	Publication inadequate; due diligence required
Whether Trial Rule 60(B) relief was proper to vacate the adoption	Mother and N.E. entitled to relief for void judgment	Adoption valid despite lack of notice	Trial Rule 60(B) relief granted; adopt decree vacated

Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306 (Sup. Ct. 1950) (due process requires diligent effort to locate whereabouts for notice)
Smith v. Tisdal, 484 N.E.2d 42 (Ind. Ct. App. 1985) (publication notice inadequate without diligence to locate mother)
Goodson v. Carlson, 888 N.E.2d 217 (Ind. Ct. App. 2008) (service by publication insufficient without better address efforts)
D.L.D. v. L.D., 911 N.E.2d 675 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009) (adequate diligence shown before publication; factors discussed)
Bays v. Bays, 489 N.E.2d 555 (Ind. Ct. App. 1986) (diligent search supported by multiple locating efforts)