Adoption of S.R.F.
In the Matter of the Adoption
of S.R.F., a minor child
R. F. and D.F., Petitioners and Appellees
C.A.M., natural mother, Respondent and Appellant
S.D.S., natural father, and
Julie Hoffman, Administrator
of the Adoption Services
Division of the North Dakota
Department of Human Services, Respondents
Southwest Judicial District,
Judge Allan L. Schmalenberger
|Nature of Action:||Adoption|
|Term:||06/2004  Argument: 06/23/2004 1:30pm|
|ND cite:||2004 ND 150|
683 N.W.2d 913
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
1. Whether Finding of Fact 15 is supported by the evidence.
2. Whether Finding of Fact 31 is supported by the evidence.
3. Whether the court erred in Conclusion of Law 3 that Carol's consent to the adoption was not required under 14-15-06(1)(b), NDCC, or 14-15-06 (1)(j), and whether thatConclusion of Law was supported by the Findings.
4. Whether the court erred in Conclusion of Law 5 that pursuant to 14-15-19 (3) (a) Carol abandoned the child, ad whether that Conclusion of Law was supported bythe Findings.
5. Whether the court erred in it's Conclusion of Law 6 pursuant to 14-15-19 (3) (b), NDCC, and whether such Conclusion of Law is supported by the Findings.
6. Whether the court erred in it's Conclusion of Law 7 that it was in the best interests of the child that Carol's parental rights be terminated.
7. Whether the court erred in it's Conclusion of Law 8 that the adoption of the child by Jack and Lynn was in his best interests.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. Whether the trial court erred in determining that the consent of the child's natural mother to the adoption was not required?
II. Whether the trial court erred in determining that the natural mother had abandoned the child?
III. Whether the trial court erred in determining that the child was a deprived child and that the deprivation of the child was likely to continue and as result the child probably will suffer serious harm?
IV. Whether the trial court erred in terminating the parental rights of the child's natural mother?
V. Whether the trial court's decision to grant the adoption was clearly erroneous?
|Add Docket 20030364 RSS|
|1||12/17/2003||NOTICE OF APPEAL: 12/16/2003|
|2||12/17/2003||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 12/16/2003|
|3||12/17/2003||(THIS IS A CONFIDENTIAL CASE)|
|4||01/16/2004||RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL: 02/04/2004|
|5||02/04/2004||TRANSCRIPT DATED August 14-15, 2003|
|6||02/05/2004||DISK - TRA (e-filed)|
|7||02/09/2004||RECORD ON APPEAL|
|8||03/09/2004||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF|
|9||03/09/2004||ACTION BY CLERK. Granted: 03/31/2004|
|12||04/01/2004||New cover page ATB/ATA, table of contents and page 18|
|13||04/02/2004||DISK - atb|
|16||04/23/2004||DISK - aeb|
|17||06/23/2004||APPEARANCES: Robert A. Keogh and Gary D. Ramsey|
|18||06/22/2004||ARGUED: Keogh; Ramsey (Vol. Z; Page 8)|
|19||06/22/2004||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|21||07/22/2004||UNANIMOUS OPINION: Sandstrom, Dale V.|
|22||07/26/2004||Judgment Mailed to Parties|
|24||08/23/2004||RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|25||05/20/2011||EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|