Adoption of Paisley
Maine Supreme Judicial Court
178 A.3d 1228 (2018)

- Written by Caitlinn Raimo, JD
Facts
Paisley was placed in the custody of the Department of Health and Human Services (department) in October 2015, when she was 12 days old, and then placed with foster parents Jonathan and Christine DeWick (defendants). The department notified Alyssa and Robert Chase (plaintiffs), the adoptive parents of two of Paisley’s biological siblings, who resided in Massachusetts. The Chases expressed interest in adopting Paisley. However, because the department’s plan was to reunify Paisley with her biological mother, who resided in Maine, placing Paisley with the Chases in Massachusetts would have made reunification efforts impractical. In June 2016, the department filed a petition for termination of Paisley’s mother’s parental rights. At that time, the Chases had their first visit with Paisley. In December 2016, the department informed the Chases that if the mother’s rights were terminated, it intended to place Paisley with them. The DeWicks, after becoming aware of that intention, filed a petition for adoption in February 2017. Paisley’s biological parents consented to termination of their parental rights. In May 2017, two weeks before the contested adoption hearing, the department decided to place Paisley with the Chases and not to consent to adoption by the DeWicks, largely due to its policy of placing siblings together. At the June 2017 hearing, the guardian ad litem recommended allowing the DeWicks to adopt Paisley. The trial court held that the department unreasonably withheld consent to the DeWicks’ adoption, granted the DeWicks’ adoption petition, and denied the Chases’ adoption petition. The Chases appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Alexander, J.)
Concurrence (Saufley, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.