Tallman v. Bantsari
This text of 564 P.2d 1371 (Tallman v. Bantsari) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Oregon primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This is an appeal by the mother and stepfather of two children from an order denying their petition for adoption by the stepfather. The father objected to the adoption. The appellants contend that the trial court erred in failing to find, pursuant to ORS 109.324, that the father’s consent was not required because he had wilfully deserted or neglected the children without just cause during the year preceding the filing of the petition.1
The parents were divorced in 1970. The father made support payments until 1974. There was an order in 1972 clarifying and another order in 1973 modifying the visitation clause of the divorce decree. In 1974, the father obtained an order for the mother to show cause why she should not be held in contempt for noncompliance with the visitation requirements of the divorce decree as modified. The outcome was that the trial court did not hold her in contempt for failure to provide visitation, but rather it further modified the decree by eliminating the requirement that the father pay support. Thereafter the father neither paid support nor visited the children, although he continues to [750]*750desire visitation and maintenance of his familial relationship with his children.
Failure to pay support and failure to visit with the children do not necessarily constitute wilful desertion or neglect without just and sufficient cause as contemplated by ORS 109.324. We have so held where the no-support/no-visitation arrangement is induced by the custodial parent, Mahoney v. Linder, 14 Or App 656, 514 P2d 901 (1973), and it is all the more true where, as here, the lack of contact between noncustodial parent and children is due to the conduct of the custodial parent and the order of court over the desires of the noncustodial parent to the contrary.
Affirmed. Costs to respondent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
564 P.2d 1371, 29 Or. App. 747, 1977 Ore. App. LEXIS 2442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tallman-v-bantsari-orctapp-1977.