Court of Appeals of Indiana
751 N.E.2d 747 (2001)
Ronald B. Hunter (plaintiff) had a romantic relationship with Carrie Colaric. Colaric became pregnant. Hunter knew of Colaric’s pregnancy. Two days after the child, J.D.C., was born, Colaric consented to the child’s adoption. The child was placed with an adoptive family. Colaric named Hunter as the putative father, or the individual who the biological mother believes in good faith is the father of her child. However, Colaric had no contact information for Hunter. The adoptive family filed an adoption petition one month after J.D.C.’s birth. Hunter had failed to register for the Indiana Putative Father’s Registry, and thus, he did not receive notice of the petition. The adoption petition was granted. Hunter later filed a motion to vacate the judgment of adoption. The trial court denied Hunter’s motion. Hunter appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Vaidik, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 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.