Lexplug logoLexplug

In Re Adoption of M

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
1998 N.J. Super. LEXIS 529, 722 A.2d 615, 317 N.J. Super. 531 (1998)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A court may exercise its equitable power to vacate a final judgment of adoption under Rule 4:50-1(f) when presented with 'truly exceptional circumstances,' where the paramount consideration becomes the best interests of an innocent third party, such as a newborn infant, whose welfare is affected by the continuation of the original adoptive relationship.


Facts:

  • A married couple adopted M., the petitioner, in 1991 when she was fifteen years old.
  • After M. reached adulthood, she and her adoptive father began a consensual romantic relationship.
  • The adoptive parents' marriage subsequently failed, and they finalized their divorce on November 18, 1997.
  • In or around October 1997, while the adoptive father was still legally married to the adoptive mother, M., then twenty-one, conceived a child with him.
  • On July 29, 1998, M. gave birth to a son, whose natural father is the adoptive father.
  • M. and her adoptive father now wish to marry, but are legally barred from doing so because New Jersey law prohibits marriage between a person and their descendants, including an adoptive daughter and father.
  • Vacating the adoption is sought to remove this legal impediment to marriage.

Procedural Posture:

  • The petitioner, M., filed an application by order to show cause in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Family Part, to vacate the 1991 final judgment of adoption.
  • The initial application sought to vacate the judgment as to both the adoptive mother and father.
  • The application was later amended to seek vacation of the judgment as to the adoptive father only, with the consent of the petitioner and adoptive mother.
  • The adoptive mother did not appear in the proceedings, but the adoptive father did and was in support of the application.
  • The court held a plenary hearing, taking testimony from the petitioner and the adoptive father.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

May a court vacate a final judgment of adoption based on 'truly exceptional circumstances' where the adoptee, now an adult, has conceived and borne a child with her adoptive father and seeks to dissolve the legal parent-child relationship to marry him and legitimize their infant?


Opinions:

Majority - Batten, J.S.C.

Yes, a court may vacate a final judgment of adoption under these circumstances. While judgments of adoption are intended to be final, they can be set aside under Rule 4:50-1(f) upon a showing of 'truly exceptional circumstances.' The court's primary duty is to promote the best interests of children, a mandate that extends beyond the original adoptee to all children affected by the judgment. Here, the adoptee is an emancipated adult, so the focus shifts to the best interests of the new infant. The court found that the combination of the adoptee's adulthood, the birth of an infant fathered by the adoptive father, and the goal of legitimizing that infant and sparing him the lifelong stigma of having a father who is simultaneously his legal grandfather constitutes 'truly exceptional circumstances.' Vacating the judgment serves the infant's best interests by removing the impediment to his parents' marriage and clarifying his familial status, which is the paramount consideration.



Analysis:

This case significantly expands the 'truly exceptional circumstances' standard for vacating an adoption judgment. It establishes that the 'best interests of the child' analysis is not limited to the original adoptee but can be applied to other children, even those born years after the adoption. The decision demonstrates the court's willingness to use its broad equitable powers to resolve complex and unforeseen family law dilemmas that statutory law does not directly address. It prioritizes the welfare of an innocent third party (the infant) over the strong public policy favoring the finality of adoption judgments.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query In Re Adoption of M (1998) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for In Re Adoption of M