Birth Mother v. Adoptive Parents and New Hope Child and Family Agency
Supreme Court of Nevada
59 P.3d 1233 (2002)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
A birth mother (plaintiff) put her child up for adoption and signed a communication agreement with New Hope Child and Family Agency (defendant), an adoption agency. The agreement provided that the birth mother would be permitted to have certain contact with the parents who adopted her child, including calls to the child, pictures of the child, and the ability to visit the child on or around each of the child’s first three birthdays. The birth mother met with a couple (the adoptive parents) (defendants) who wanted to adopt a child, and the birth mother consented to their adoption of her child. The adoptive parents signed the communication agreement and initially complied with the agreement. The adoptive parents then filed a formal petition for adoption of the child. The birth mother objected to the petition and demanded that the child be returned to her. Upon the birth mother’s objection, the adoptive parents ceased to comply with the agreement. The district court granted the adoptive parents’ petition for adoption. The adoption decree did not contain any reference to the communication agreement. The birth mother brought suit against the adoptive parents for breach of contact. The district court granted the adoptive parents’ motion to dismiss the claim. The birth mother appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Shearing, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 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.