In re Adoption of S.R.C.-Q.
Kansas Court of Appeals
367 P.3d 1276 (2016)
- Written by Tammy Boggs, JD
Facts
During child-welfare proceedings initiated by a Kansas agency (plaintiff), a young child, S.R.C.-Q., was placed in the temporary custody of S.R.C.-Q.’s father (the father) (defendant). The father’s residence was in Kansas. S.R.C.-Q.’s mother (the mother) (defendant) lived in Wisconsin, where S.R.C.-Q had previously resided for several years with the mother. The proceedings reached a point at which the Kansas court had to determine an appropriate permanent placement for S.R.C.-Q. The mother sought S.R.C-Q.’s placement with her in the home of S.R.C-Q.’s maternal grandmother in Wisconsin. The father objected, arguing that the Interstate Compact on Placement of Children (ICPC) applied to the out-of-state placement of a child and the State of Wisconsin had not responded to the court’s request for a placement decision. The court decided that the ICPC did not apply to the placement of a child with a parent in another state and ordered S.R.C.-Q.’s placement with the mother in Wisconsin and that S.R.C.-Q. would have visits with the father in Kansas. The father and S.R.C-Q.’s guardian ad litem appealed, contending that the court incorrectly decided that the ICPC did not apply.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Powell, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
