Summary
The Kentucky Supreme Court held that a former same-sex partner had a cognizable custodial interest sufficient to intervene as of right in a step-parent adoption proceeding under Kentucky Rule of Civil Procedure 24.01. The court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court’s orders permitting intervention and dismissing the adoption action.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether A. H. had a sufficient cognizable legal interest to intervene as a matter of right in the stepparent-adoption proceeding under Kentucky Civil Rule 24.01(b).
- Whether standing to seek adoption is a prerequisite to intervention in an adoption proceeding.
- Whether the circuit court clearly erred by permitting intervention and dismissing the stepparent-adoption action so that A. H.'s custody claim could be addressed first.
Holdings
- Standing to seek adoption is not a condition for intervening in an adoption proceeding; intervention and standing are distinct concepts.
- A. H. satisfied CR 24.01(b) because she asserted a cognizable custodial and relational interest in the child, and an adoption order could impair or impede her ability to protect that interest.
- The circuit court did not clearly err by granting A. H.'s motion to intervene.
- The decision was confined to intervention as a matter of right under CR 24.01 and did not foreclose permissive intervention under CR 24.02.
Key quotations
“standing and intervention are two distinct concepts, and that standing to seek adoption is not a condition for intervening in an adoption proceeding.” (at 3)
“This level of association and collaboration in the creation and rearing of a child clearly indicates a cognizable legal interest for purposes of intervening in an adoption proceeding.” (at 5)
“Lastly, our analysis is confined to the issue of intervention as a matter of right under CR 24.01.” (at 6)
Factual background
A. H. and M. L. were in a committed same-sex relationship and decided to have a child through artificial insemination. M. L. gave birth to the child in 2006, and A. H. was involved in the child's life as a parent; the couple and child lived together until the relationship ended in 2011. After M. L. married W. R. L., W. R. L. petitioned for stepparent adoption, while A. H. pursued custody and visitation and sought to intervene to protect her relationship with the child.
Procedural history
W. R. L. filed a petition for stepparent adoption of the child in Kenton County. A. H., who had been in a committed relationship with the child's biological mother and sought custody and visitation, moved to intervene and to dismiss the adoption proceeding because of her pending custody petition in Ohio. The Kenton Circuit Court granted intervention and dismissed the adoption action. The Court of Appeals reversed, concluding that A. H. lacked standing to seek adoption and directing reinstatement of the adoption proceeding. The Supreme Court of Kentucky reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the circuit court's orders.
Remand instructions
The Court of Appeals' opinion was reversed, and the trial court's orders granting A. H. intervention and dismissing the stepparent-adoption action were reinstated.