Peterson v. Jacobitz
309 Neb. 486
| Neb. | 2021Background
- Jodi gave birth to Kooper in Kearney (Buffalo County), later petitioned in Phelps County for a stepparent adoption with her husband; Austin was identified and given notice as the putative father.
- Austin filed a “Complaint to Establish Paternity and Objection to Proposed Adoption” in Phelps County and moved to transfer venue to Buffalo County.
- Phelps County Court granted the motion and transferred the case to Buffalo County.
- Buffalo County Court dismissed, holding Phelps never had jurisdiction to transfer the matter under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-104.05.
- The Nebraska Court of Appeals reversed, reasoning § 43-104.05(1) prescribes venue (county of birth) while county courts have jurisdiction over adoptions under § 24-517, so Phelps could transfer.
- The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals: § 43-104.05(1) is venue language; § 43-104.05(4)(a) governs timing/length of a court’s authority, not grant of jurisdiction; § 24-517 supplies county-court jurisdiction over adoptions, so Phelps could transfer to Buffalo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the county court where a petition is filed (Phelps) had subject-matter jurisdiction to consider and transfer a putative-father paternity/objection action under § 43-104.05 | Austin: County courts have exclusive adoption jurisdiction (§ 24-517); § 43-104.05(1) sets venue only; Phelps therefore had jurisdiction and could transfer to proper venue. | Jodi: § 43-104.05(4)(a) vests jurisdiction in the county court of the child’s birth (Buffalo), so Phelps lacked jurisdiction and could not validly transfer. | Court held Phelps had jurisdiction to act and transfer. § 43-104.05(1) is venue language; § 24-517 grants jurisdiction; § 43-104.05(4)(a) addresses timing/length of exercise of authority, not jurisdiction. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re Adoption of Micah H., 301 Neb. 437, 918 N.W.2d 834 (2018) (context on juvenile/adoption procedures)
- Anderson v. A & R Ag Spraying & Trucking, 306 Neb. 484, 946 N.W.2d 435 (2020) (statutory interpretation principles)
- E.M. v. Nebraska Dept. of Health & Human Servs., 306 Neb. 1, 944 N.W.2d 252 (2020) (rules on giving effect to all statutory language)
- Peterson v. Jacobitz, 29 Neb. App. 486, 955 N.W.2d 329 (2021) (Nebraska Court of Appeals decision reversing dismissal)