Cara (plaintiff) had a child, B.G.C., and Cara decided to give B.G.C. up for adoption. Cara named Scott as B.G.C.’s father, and Cara and Scott both signed waivers of notice of the termination hearing. Following a hearing, the court terminated Cara and Scott’s parental rights. Cara later filed a motion to set aside the termination, asserting that B.G.C.’s father was, in fact, Daniel (plaintiff) and not Scott. Daniel was aware of Cara’s pregnancy, but he did not seek to assert his parental rights. In addition, Daniel did not have a good track record as a parent to his other children. The juvenile court denied Cara’s motion. R.D. (defendant) and J.D. (defendant) filed a petition to adopt B.G.C. In the adoption case, the district court determined that Daniel was the father and had not relinquished his parental rights. Accordingly, the district court denied R.D. and J.D.’s adoption petition. The court of appeals also reversed and remanded the juvenile court’s decision terminating Cara’s parental rights. R.D. and J.D. then moved to terminate Daniel’s parental rights to allow the adoption to go through. The district court denied R.D. and J.D.’s petition, because the ground of abandonment had not been established. R.D. and J.D. appealed.