In Re Melissa C.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1DissentGlassman, Justice
I respectfully dissent. I do not agree with the court that the requirement of agency consent in 19 M.R.S.A. § 532(1)(C) (1981) was intended by the Legislature to give an unnatural parent an arbitrary, unreasonable or capricious power to defeat the exclusive jurisdiction of the probate courts to determine whether it is in the *948best interest of a child that she be adopted by the petitioners and to issue a judgment granting or denying the adoption.
Maine adoption law vests jurisdiction over adoption proceedings exclusively within the probate courts. 4 M.R.S.A. § 251 (1979); 19 M.R.S.A. § 531…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- State ex rel. Baker v. BirdSupreme Court of Missouri · 1913
- State ex rel. Portage County Welfare Dept. v. SummersOhio Supreme Court · 1974
- Savory v. Office of State GuardianAppellate Court of Illinois · 1981
- Harmon v. FaganSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1931