McLary v. Follett
Maryland Court of Appeals
226 Md. 436, 174 A.2d 66 (1961)
- Written by Meredith Hamilton Alley, JD
Facts
Follett (plaintiff) married Helen Hotalen, who had a daughter (the stepdaughter) from a previous marriage. A son was born of the marriage in August 1956. In April 1957, Follett and Hotalen separated, and Hotalen took the stepdaughter and son to live with her. A few weeks later, after the police warned Hotalen that she should stop mistreating the stepdaughter, Hotalen asked Follett to pick up the stepdaughter and take custody of her. When Follett picked up the stepdaughter, Hotalen told Follett that the son was visiting elsewhere but Follett could pick him up the next weekend. Follett cared for the stepdaughter from then on. When Follett returned to take custody of the son, Hotalen and the son were gone. Follett searched continuously for the son until early 1959, when Follett learned that the son had been adopted. Follett hired an attorney and filed a petition to determine whether the adoption proceedings were fraudulent. The ensuing investigation determined that Hotalen had sworn that she was unmarried and did not know where to find her boyfriend, as she called Follett. It was undisputed that Follett had not received notice of the adoption. The trial court nullified the adoption based on the finding that Hotalen had committed fraud. Finding that the son would have a good life with Follett, the court ordered Follett to take custody of the son. The adoptive parents appealed. One argument was that the trial court should have found that Follett failed to make a sincere effort to find the son, committing abandonment and losing his parental rights.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Prescott, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 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.