[DOWNLOAD] "Adoption P. J. K. J. D. L. and N. J. L" by Springfield District Missouri Court of Appeals " eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Adoption P. J. K. J. D. L. and N. J. L
- Author : Springfield District Missouri Court of Appeals
- Release Date : January 07, 1962
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 87 KB
Description
This is an appeal by an objecting father from a decree of adoption of his child by her stepfather. The child sought to be adopted is ""a dainty, finely formed little girl with sparkling brown eyes, blond hair and fair complexion,"" who was born in L County, Texas, on February 4, 1958, of the marriage between B. J. K. (hereinafter called the father) and N. J. K. (hereinafter called the mother), which had been solemnized in Missouri on July 21, 1956, two weeks before the mother had attained her eighteenth birthday. This marriage, of which the child was the only issue, ran aground in stormy matrimonial seas and was dissolved on September 24, 1959, in the District Court of L County, Texas, by decree granting a divorce to the mother ""on the grounds of cruel treatment"" and awarding care and custody of the child to the mother but with no provision for the child's support. After the divorce, the mother and the child lived with the mother's parents in Southern Missouri until the latter part of 1959, when they settled in Springfield and the mother found employment to support herself and the child. In March 1960 the mother met J. D. L. (hereinafter called the stepfather) and, after a three-month courtship, they were married on June 18, 1960. Both were then twenty-one years of age. It was the first marriage for the stepfather, a high school graduate steadily employed for four years (at the time of marriage) as a body and fender man at an automotive repair shop. On March 22, 1961, the stepfather instituted this adoption proceeding by the filing of his petition in which the mother joined for the stated purpose of giving her express consent to the adoption prayed. Cf. In re Adoption of Siler, 240 Mo. App.1097, 1098, 225 S.W.2d 379. As obviating the necessity of submitting the father's written consent to adoption, it was alleged that, for a period of more than one year immediately prior to the filing of the petition, he had willfully neglected to provide the child with proper care and maintenance. Section 453.040(4). (All statutory references are to RSMo 1959, V.A.M.S.) Immediately upon institution of the proceeding, the court appointed a member of the bar as guardian ad litem of the child [Section 453.020], and in due time the guardian filed his answer. On April 3, 1961, a juvenile court officer filed a detailed report or study [Section 453.070], which was, as the trial Judge aptly summarized it, ""very favorable"" to the petitioning stepfather and mother. On May 18, 1961, the father filed his answer in which he objected to the adoption of the child, stated that petitioners had not had the child ""in their legal custody"" for a period of nine months [Section 453.080], alleged that the mother had ""refused support from this defendant (the father) for the minor child and will not accept such support,"" complained that he had been refused the right to visit or see the child, denied that he had ""willfully neglected to provide for her care and maintenance,"" and averred boldly and unequivocally that "" he (the father has always contributed to the support of the child."" (All emphasis herein is ours.) With all interested parties represented by counsel, a contested hearing was held on July 20, 1961, at the Conclusion of which the matter was taken under advisement to permit the filing of briefs. And, on August 25, 1961, the trial court entered a decree of adoption supported by a written memorandum and finding of facts in which he emphasized (and appropriately so in view of the sharply-conflicting evidence) that he had had ""the opportunity to see the parties face to face and hear the testimony and attempt to Judge the sincerity of the parties"" and expressed himself as believing ""very strongly that the conduct of this father constitutes such willful failure to support and maintain that it comes within the statute [Section 453.040(4)] which eliminates the necessity for written consent.""