In re Adoption of Madysen S.
293 Neb. 646
| Neb. | 2016Background
- Nicole K. (mother) divorced Jeremy S. (father) after criminal sexual-abuse allegations; county dissolution granted custody to Nicole and prohibited Jeremy’s parenting time.
- Jeremy was later convicted and incarcerated; he continued to pay court-ordered child support (via his mother) and sent letters/cards but had little direct contact with the children for ~7 years.
- Nicole remarried William K., and Nicole and William filed stepparent adoption petitions and concurrent petitions asking the court to find Jeremy abandoned the children under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-104(2)(b) so his consent would not be required.
- The county court found Jeremy had abandoned the children and ordered that his consent was not required; the adoption hearings remained pending.
- Jeremy appealed the county court’s abandonment finding; the Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed, and the Nebraska Supreme Court granted further review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an interlocutory county-court finding under § 43-104(2)(b) that a parent abandoned a child is a final, appealable order | Nicole/William: the abandonment finding is reviewable because it removes the parent’s required consent and effectively ends parental involvement in the adoption process | Jeremy: the finding should be appealable only after final judgment; interlocutory appeal is appropriate because abandonment is a threshold, dispositive issue | Held: Not final or appealable; abandonment finding in pending adoption only removes need for consent and substitute consent may be ordered, but parental rights are not terminated until final adoption decree, so interlocutory appeal lacks jurisdiction |
| Whether an immediate appeal is justified under the "substantial right" exception to the general bar on interlocutory appeals | Nicole/William: the right (to contest termination of parental consent) is substantial and will be irreparably affected if not immediately reviewable | Jeremy: postponing review would not irreparably harm his ability to vindicate rights on appeal from the final adoption judgment | Held: The order affects an important right but does not irreparably undermine it; rights can be vindicated on appeal from the final adoption decree, so exception does not apply |
| Whether prior Nebraska decisions requiring interlocutory review (e.g., In re Adoption of David C.) govern here | Nicole/William: past decisions recognize interlocutory appeals of abandonment findings | Jeremy: those precedents are distinguishable or wrongly decided | Held: Overrules In re Adoption of David C. to the extent it allowed interlocutory appeals of abandonment; those decisions are disapproved where they conflict with rule that adoption decree, not abandonment finding, terminates parental rights |
| Whether a parent retains standing after a § 43-104(2)(b) abandonment finding to contest best interests at the final adoption hearing | Nicole/William: abandonment finding removes parent’s role; no standing to contest adoption | Jeremy: parent retains interest and standing to litigate best interests until parental rights are finally terminated | Held: Parent retains a personal stake and standing to contest best interests until the final adoption decree; abandonment finding does not eliminate standing |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Jackson, 291 Neb. 908 (jurisdictional and final-order principles)
- In re Adoption of David C., 280 Neb. 719 (overruled to extent permitting interlocutory appeals of abandonment)
- Klein v. Klein, 230 Neb. 385 (order consenting to adoption is not final; final decree is appealable)
- In re Guardianship of Sain, 211 Neb. 508 (abandonment standard and parental rights discussion)
- In re Adoption of Kassandra B. & Nicholas B., 248 Neb. 912 (adoption is statutory; consent is foundational)
- Furstenfeld v. Pepin, 287 Neb. 12 (definition of a substantial right)
- Kometscher v. Wade, 177 Neb. 299 (final judgment and judgment definition)