Adoption of Lingol

California Court of Appeal Nov 9, 1951 No. Civ. No. 18547Published

Before: Wilson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying an adoption petition where the evidence overwhelmingly demonstrated that the petitioners were fit parents and that the adoption served the child's best interests, despite the Department of Social Welfare's reliance on the petitioner's conduct from over a decade prior.

Issues

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying an adoption petition based solely on the petitioner's past conduct occurring more than a decade prior to the proceedings.

Disposition. reversed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We are mindful of the rule that the granting or denial of a petition for adoption rests within the sound discretion of the court and that an appellate court is without power to reverse such an order unless the evidence shows that discretion has been abused.”

“In consideration of the entire record and of the facts and circumstances shown thereby we are constrained to hold that the denial of the petition was an abuse of discretion and should therefore be reversed.”

107 Cal.App.2d 457 (1951) ADOPTION OF JANE DOE LINGOL, a Minor. ROBERT DAVID WHITE et al., Appellants,

STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL WELFARE, Respondent.

Civ. No. 18547. California Court of Appeals. Second Dist., Div. Two.

Nov. 9, 1951. Sidney J. Unickel and Sidney Sampson for Appellants.

Edmund G. Brown, Attorney General, and Ariel C. Hilton, Deputy Attorney General, for Respondent.

WILSON, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for the adoption of a minor who is an illegitimate child born November 12, 1943, in California. She was given into the custody of petitioners Robert David White and Flora May White, husband and wife, by her natural mother nine days after her birth and ever since has been in their custody and has been reared as their own daughter.

The court did not make any findings of fact nor did it state any reasons for denying the petition but entered the order of denial without comment. There is therefore nothing in the record to indicate whether the court considered the evidence insufficient to warrant the granting of the petition or was influenced solely by the recommendation of the agents of the Department of Social Welfare.

The petition for adoption was uncontested except for the report of the Department of Social Welfare recommending that the petition be denied on the ground that there was "doubt" as to the stability of petitioner Flora. Such doubt was based on events prior to 1938. Nothing has occurred since that date to cause any apprehension that she is now unstable. No evidence was offered in anywise detrimental to petitioner Robert. His good character and steady employment are affirmatively established by the report and by the evidence.

The report shows and petitioner Flora admits that she had been married six times during the 17-year period from November 1922 to October 1939, each marriage having been dissolved by divorce or annulment. The first marriage was contracted at the instance of her stepfather when she was a child of 16 years. During 1933 and 1934 she served 11 months in the Missouri State Prison on a charge of accomplice to murder. She was subsequently granted a full pardon by the governor of Missouri and was restored to citizenship. Petitioners are aged 39 and 44 years respectively. They were married in June, 1940, and have lived together as husband and wife ever since that date.

Adoption of Lingol

AI Brief

WILSON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief