Legal Opinion

Adoption of Nicole

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided April 4, 1996No. 95-P-1241PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.

There are four arguments that the biological father presses in his appeal from a decree under G. L. c. 210, § 3, dispensing with his consent to the adoption of his daughter Nicole: 1) the Probate Court judge mistakenly equated his incarceration with parental unfitness; 2) the child welfare agency involved failed to make the effort required by statute to hold the biological family unit together; 3) the judge erroneously denied a motion for a new trial or to amend findings without an evidentiary hearing; and 4) the judge erroneously forbade postadoption visitation by the father. We affirm.

Prior…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hartmann v. Boston Herald-Traveler Corp.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1948
  2. Bezio v. PatenaudeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
  3. In Re the Department of Public Welfare to Dispense With Consent to AdoptionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
  4. Adoption of CarlosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
  5. In Re Department of Social Services to Dispense With Consent to AdoptionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1984

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Adoption of VitoMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2000
  2. Adoption of GregoryMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2001
  3. Youmans v. RamosMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1999
  4. Adoption of WarrenMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
  5. Adoption of TerrenceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2003

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API