Donjuan v. McDermott
2011 UT 72
| Utah | 2011Background
- Father Donjuan sought paternity in Utah and had a Georgia paternity filing; he did not file the sworn affidavit required by 78B-6-121 or other sworn statements before mother’s consent.
- Mother McDermott gave birth July 31, 2009 and executed consent to adoption August 8, 2009.
- Utah law requires an unmarried biological father to file a sworn affidavit and meet other conditions before the mother’s consent is executed.
- Donjuan amended his petition after the mother’s consent, attempting to include the required affidavit.
- District court dismissed the amended petition as untimely for failure to strictly comply with 78B-6-121 before consent was given.
- Supreme Court affirmed, holding the relation-back doctrine does not apply to the affidavit requirement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 15 allows amendment to include the affidavit after consent | Donjuan argues amendment relates back to original petition | McDermott argues statutory requirement mandates pre-consent affidavit | No; relation back does not apply post-consent |
| Whether amendment raises due process concerns or PKPA issues | Donjuan claims due process and PKPA violations | State did not preserve these issues; PKPA not divesting jurisdiction | Issues not preserved for appeal; not addressed on the merits |
| Whether district court erred in venue or subject matter jurisdiction implications | Donjuan challenges jurisdiction/venue | District court dismissed on statutory compliance; PKPA not raised properly | moot after affirming untimeliness; issue not reached |
| Preservation of constitutional/PKPA claims on appeal | Claims should be reviewed despite not raised below | Claims not preserved; exceptions do not apply | Claims not preserved; declined to address |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of Connor, 158 P.3d 1097 (Utah 2007) (strict compliance with 78B-6-121; affidavit must be filed before consent)
- Russell v. Standard Corp., 898 P.2d 263 (Utah 1995) (relation back defined; limitations period concerns)
- Scarsella v. Pollak, 607 N.W.2d 711 (Mich. 2000) (affidavit required to initiate claim cannot be cured by amendment after statute runs)
- Fales v. Jacobs, 588 S.E.2d 294 (Ga. App. 2003) (affidavit requirement cannot be cured by amendment after limitations)
- Thigpen v. Ngo, 558 S.E.2d 162 (N.C. 2002) (statutory affidavit requirement; limitations on amendments)
- J.M.W. v. T.I.Z. (In re Baby E.Z.), 266 P.3d 702 (Utah 2011) (PKPA does not divest subject matter jurisdiction; preservation rule applied)