Legal Opinion

X.T. v. M.M.

Court of Appeals of Arkansas

Decided September 1, 2010No. CA 09-1225PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

JOHN MAUZY PITTMAN, Judge.

11 This is an appeal from an order of the Benton County Circuit Court finding that consent to adoption was not required of appellant X.T. because, although he was a putative father of baby girl A.M., he failed to establish a significant custodial, personal, or financial relationship with her before the petition for adoption was filed. Ark. Code Ann. § 9-9-207(a)(ll) (Repl.2009). The trial court further found that, even if appellant’s consent to the adoption had been required, he was unreasonably withholding that consent contrary to the best interest of the child.…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Stanley v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Lehr v. RobertsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Quilloin v. WalcottSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  4. In Re Baby Girl EasonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1987
  5. Lipsey v. BattleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re Adoption of Baby Boy B.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2012
  2. In re Adoption of Baby Boy B.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API