Summary
The Indiana Supreme Court held that publication notice of a paternal grandparents’ adoption petition was insufficient because the grandparents and their counsel failed to conduct the diligent search required by due process to locate the child’s mother. The court concluded that the defective notice deprived the trial court of personal jurisdiction over the mother and rendered the adoption decree void as to her. The case was remanded with directions to grant the mother’s Trial Rule 60(B) motion and vacate the adoption decree.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether service by publication satisfied the Due Process Clause when the petitioners had not performed a diligent search reasonably calculated to locate Mother.
- Whether the adoption decree was void for lack of personal jurisdiction and therefore subject to being set aside under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B).
Holdings
- Service by publication was constitutionally inadequate because Paternal Grandparents and their counsel failed to perform the diligent search required before resorting to publication, including failing to contact N.E., who had previously been used to provide notice and could have helped locate Mother.
- Because publication did not confer personal jurisdiction over Mother, the adoption decree was void and Mother's Trial Rule 60(B) motion should have been granted.
Key quotations
“"[W]hen notice is a person's due, process which is a mere gesture is not due process. The means employed must be such as one desirous of actually informing the absentee might reasonably adopt to accomplish it."” (670)
“Because Paternal Grandparents and their counsel failed to perform the diligent search for Mother required by the Due Process Clause, notice and service of process by publication was insufficient to confer personal jurisdiction over Mother.” (671)
Factual background
Mother gave birth to Child while unmarried and incarcerated. Paternal Grandparents filed a new adoption petition in 2007 and obtained service by publication after asserting that Mother's address and telephone number were unknown, although they had previously provided notice through N.E. and knew N.E. could assist in locating Mother. Paternal Grandparents did not inform N.E. of the new petition, and Mother and N.E. jointly sought to vacate the adoption decree within two weeks after learning of it.
Procedural history
Paternal Grandparents obtained an adoption decree after serving Mother by publication. Mother and N.E. moved under Indiana Trial Rule 60(B) to vacate the decree, arguing that the adoption judgment was void because required notice had not been provided. The trial court denied relief, and the Court of Appeals affirmed as to Mother. The Indiana Supreme Court granted transfer, vacated the Court of Appeals opinion, and reversed the trial court.
Remand instructions
The case was returned to the trial court with directions to grant Mother's Trial Rule 60(B) motion and vacate the adoption decree.