963 N.E.2d 625
Ind. Ct. App.2012Background
- M.P.S., Jr. was born March 2, 2010 to A.S. and M.P.S., Sr. who were minors.
- Grandparents in Indiana and Virginia pressured when the family lived with them; consents to adoption were executed in December 2010.
- Bartanen-Blevins advised the parents that consents were revocable within a period, but she also stated she was acting for Grandparents and her notary commission had expired.
- Grandparents filed a petition to adopt and a home study was submitted, but the study and related documents were flawed or improper.
- The trial court orally granted adoption on February 8, 2011 and later issued a written order; Mother learned of the hearing afterward and moved to correct error or for relief from judgment, which the court denied.
- The appellate court reversed and remanded with instructions to vacate the adoption decree and return custody to the biological mother under Indiana law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mother's consent to adoption was voluntary and valid. | Mother contends she was coerced and misled, rendering consent involuntary. | Grandparents argue consent was valid and properly obtained. | Consent invalid; set aside. |
| Whether notice and the final adoption hearing violated due process. | Mother asserts lack of proper notice and deliberate removal from Indiana to thwart withdrawal of consent. | Grandparents contend notice and hearing complied with law. | Due process violated; decree vacated. |
| Whether the home-study process complied with statutory requirements. | Home study was inadequate and conducted by an unlicensed individual without complete information. | Home study complied or was waived; not contested. | Home study was inadequate; invalid basis for the adoption. |
Key Cases Cited
- Matter of Adoption of Topel, 571 N.E.2d 1295 (Ind.Ct.App.1991) (parental rights are fundamental; consent must be voluntary and not conditioned on visitation rights)
- In re Adoption of M.L.L., 810 N.E.2d 1088 (Ind.Ct.App.2004) (abuse of discretion standard in adoption matters; do not reweigh evidence)
- In re Adoption of M.M.G.C., 785 N.E.2d 267 (Ind.Ct.App.2003) (trial court must have adequate information to support the adoption decree)
- Munster Cmty. Hosp. v. Bernacke, 874 N.E.2d 611 (Ind.Ct.App.2007) (abuse of discretion standard in setting aside judgments)