Rodgers v. Rodgers, 519 S.W.3d 324

Background

Reanna and Chris Rodgers divorced in 2011 and had joint custody of four children; Chris later married Destiny.
A September 2013 temporary custody order awarded Chris sole custody and suspended Reanna's visitation after Reanna tested positive for methamphetamine; the court invited Reanna to seek reinstatement after passing a drug screen and ordered a hair-follicle test.
Reanna submitted clean drug tests in October 2013 and April 2014 but did not petition to reinstate visitation; she admitted a relapse after October 2013 but claims to have been drug free since December 2013.
Destiny petitioned to adopt the children in September 2014 with Chris’s consent, alleging Reanna had for at least one year failed significantly and without justifiable cause to communicate with or provide support for the children.
At the May 2015 adoption hearing, Reanna conceded she had no contact and provided no support between September 2013 and September 2014, and attempted to pay support only after the adoption petition was filed.
The circuit court found Reanna’s failures were meaningful and without justifiable cause and concluded her consent to adoption was not required under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-207(a)(2); the Supreme Court affirmed, vacating the court of appeals’ opinion.

Issues

Issue	Rodgers' Argument	Destiny's Argument	Held
Whether a parent’s consent is unnecessary under Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-207(a)(2) when the parent for ≥1 year failed significantly and without justifiable cause to communicate with the child	Reanna: the court’s suspension of visitation and admonition meant she was justified in not communicating or paying support	Destiny: suspension of visitation did not excuse other forms of communication or the statutory duty to support; Reanna made no efforts to contact or support the children for >1 year	Held: Reanna unjustifiably failed to communicate with and to support the children for at least one year; her consent not required
Whether a temporary visitation suspension constitutes "justifiable cause" to excuse noncommunication under § 9-9-207	Reanna: the order and the judge’s admonitions reasonably led her to believe all contact was barred	Destiny: the order did not prohibit communication by phone, cards, attendance at events, or petitioning the court once drug-free	Held: visitation suspension is not per se justification; Reanna could have communicated by other means and could have petitioned for reinstatement once drug-free
Whether failure to pay support was excused by the temporary order stating "no child support shall be ordered"	Reanna: the order relieved her of support obligations for the period	Destiny: legal and moral duty to support exists irrespective of a support order; Reanna provided no support for >1 year	Held: statutory and case law require parental support regardless of order; Reanna’s failure to support was without justifiable cause
Whether the one-year statutory period accrued before the filing of the adoption petition	Reanna: the period did not accrue while visitation was suspended or before she filed a clean hair test; petition filed prematurely	Destiny: the one-year period ran from the time Reanna ceased meaningful contact and support; petition was timely	Held: Court concluded the one-year failure had occurred before petition filing and adoption consent was unnecessary

Key Cases Cited

Racine v. Nelson, 378 S.W.3d 93 (Ark. 2011) ("failed significantly" means meaningful failure, not total failure)
In re Adoption of K.F.H. & K.F.H., 844 S.W.2d 343 (Ark. 1992) ("without justifiable cause" denotes voluntary, willful, arbitrary failure)
Martini v. Price, 507 S.W.3d 486 (Ark. 2016) (analysis of justification where court orders limited contact; factual circumstances determine reasonableness)
Fonken v. Fonken, 976 S.W.2d 952 (Ark. 1998) (parent has legal and moral duty to support child regardless of existence of an order)
In re Adoption of Lybrand, 946 S.W.2d 946 (Ark. 1997) (adoption petitioner must prove statutory grounds by clear and convincing evidence)