In Re Adoption of a Minor

D.C. Circuit

In Re Adoption of a Minor

204 F.2d 55, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 163, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2391

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMarch 26, 1953

Docket11548_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 204 F.2d 55 (In Re Adoption of a Minor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

In Re Adoption of a Minor, 204 F.2d 55, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 163, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2391 (D.C. Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The case was here before in In re Adoption of a Minor, 1952, 90 U.S.App.D.C. 107, 194 F.2d 325. We then remanded because of the absence of a definite showing that the District Court had considered and reached a decision that the consent of the natural father to the -adoption, which consent had been withheld, could be dispensed with upon any of the grounds specified in the applicable statute, § 16-202, D.C.Code (1940 and 1951). Our decision left to the sound discretion of the District Court whether the record need be opened for further evidence. In the proceedings consequent upon the remand, 'now before us, the District Court disposed of the case on the record previously rhade. It is clear that this was done in the exercise of a sound discretion No contention to the contrary is made.

The adoption decree is now supported by sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law, and recites that it appears to the satisfaction of the court that the consent of the natural father should be dispensed with for extraordinary cause shown, one of the statutory grounds. The evidence supports the findings and these, with the conclusions of 1-aw, support the decree. It is almost inevitable that the outcome of this difficult and trying case, as the court below characterized it, should not be satisfactory to the father; but we find no basis for setting aside the decree. It accordingly is

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The case was here before in In re Adoption of a Minor, 1952, 90 U.S.App.D.C. 107, 194 F.2d 325. We then remanded because of the absence of a definite showing that the District Court had considered and reached a decision that the consent of the natural father to the -adoption, which consent had been withheld, could be dispensed with upon any of the grounds specified in the applicable statute, § 16-202, D.C.Code (1940 and 1951). Our decision left to the sound discretion of the District Court whether the record need be opened for further evidence. In the proceedings consequent upon the remand, 'now before us, the District Court disposed of the case on the record previously rhade. It is clear that this was done in the exercise of a sound discretion No contention to the contrary is made.

The adoption decree is now supported by sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law, and recites that it appears to the satisfaction of the court that the consent of the natural father should be dispensed with for extraordinary cause shown, one of the statutory grounds. The evidence supports the findings and these, with the conclusions of 1-aw, support the decree. It is almost inevitable that the outcome of this difficult and trying case, as the court below characterized it, should not be satisfactory to the father; but we find no basis for setting aside the decree. It accordingly is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 F.2d 55, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 163, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 2391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-adoption-of-a-minor-cadc-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack