Legal Opinion

In re Adoption of McDermitt

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided July 31, 1980No. 79-1056PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Per curiam

I

In his first proposition of law, appellant asserts that in the phrase, “communicate with the minor child or to provide maintenance and support of the minor,” in R. C. 3107.07(A), the “or” must be read and applied as an “and.” We do not agree.

R. C. 3107.07 reads as follows:

“Consent to adoption is not required of any of the following:
“(A) A parent of a minor, when it is alleged in the adoption petition and the court finds after proper service of notice and hearing, that the parent has failed without justifiable cause to communicate with the minor or to provide for the maintenance and support…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Moats v. Metropolitan Bank of LimaOhio Supreme Court · 1974
  2. State ex rel. Portage County Welfare Dept. v. SummersOhio Supreme Court · 1974
  3. In Re the Adoption of GreerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1969
  4. DeGolyer v. ChesneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1974
  5. Village of Clarington v. AltharOhio Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. In re Adoption of HolcombOhio Supreme Court · 1985
  2. In re Adoption of MasaOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Mills-Jennings of Ohio, Inc. v. Department of Liquor ControlOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  4. In re Adoption of LayOhio Supreme Court · 1986
  5. Allis-Chalmers Credit Corp. v. HerboltOhio Court of Appeals · 1984

18 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