Law School Case Brief
Birth Mother v. Adoptive Parents (in Re Adoption of a Minor Child) - 118 Nev. 962, 60 P.3d 485 (2002)
During a hearing, as in a trial, the right to discovery is subject to the discretion of the district court. Nev. R. Civ. P. 26(i). Absent a clear abuse of discretion, the appellate court will not disturb a district court's decision regarding discovery. Nev. R. Civ. P. 26(i) instructs the district court, in exercising its discretion, to consider, among other things, the diligence or lack of diligence of the party seeking the discovery or order and the reasons for not having completed the discovery or having had the motion heard earlier.
The birth mother relinquished her parental rights to her child to New Hope Child and Family Agency ("New Hope") for the purpose of adoption. New Hope and the birth mother ultimately selected the adoptive parents. The adoptive parents filed a petition for adoption with the district court. While the petition was pending, the birth mother filed an objection to the adoption, alleging that due to a series of traumatic events that occurred around the child's birth, she was incapable of giving knowing, voluntary, and intelligent consent to the relinquishment of her child. Upon the birth mother's objection, the district court held a hearing to determine the validity of her prior consent. During the three-day hearing, the birth mother filed supplemental objections, additional discovery requests, and a motion to revoke the relinquishment of her child because the relinquishment form did not state the names of the adoptive parents. The district court denied all requests and motions. At the conclusion of the hearing, the district court determined that the birth mother's consent was valid and, shortly thereafter, granted the adoptive parents' petition for adoption. The birth mother then filed an appeal challenging the district court's failure to consider her supplemental objections, failure to grant her discovery requests, denial of her motion to revoke the relinquishment of the child for adoption, and the determination that her consent was valid.
Was the birth mother's consent to relinquish her parental rights to her child valid?
The state supreme court affirmed the district court's adoption decree. It held that the mother was allowed to fully examine every witness on all factual matters, and sufficient evidence was presented at the hearing, prior to the birth mother's supplemental objections, to indicate that the adoption agency made all necessary inquiries into the child's ancestry. The mother's discovery requests sought confidential documents that were irrelevant as to whether the mother's relinquishment was voluntary, and the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the birth mother's tardy discovery requests. Because the adoption was an agency adoption, not a specific adoption, the names of the adoptive parents were not required to appear on the relinquishment for adoption form. Finally, the court held that the evidence supported the finding that the mother was aware of what was going on at the time of the adoption, and understood the effect of her relinquishment.
Access the full text case
Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Be Sure You're Prepared for Class