In re the Matter of M.E.M., Jr.

Summary

The Montana Supreme Court held that Nellie Silk, the child's extended family member and an enrolled member of an Indian tribe, had a statutory right to intervene in adoption proceedings under the Indian Child Welfare Act and Montana Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a). The court concluded that her motion was timely given that state agencies had not informed her of the termination or adoption proceedings. The judgment was reversed and remanded for consideration of her adoption petition alongside the foster parents' petition, subject to the ICWA placement preferences.

Holdings

1. Silk had a statutory right to intervene because she was an extended family member under the Indian Child Welfare Act, had an interest in the adoption proceeding arising from the Act's placement preferences, was not adequately represented by the existing parties, and had acted timely under the circumstances.
2. The absence of the state agency's consent could not automatically bar Silk's adoption claim when, in the court's discretion, denying the claim for lack of consent would not promote the child's best interests.
3. On remand, the competing adoption petitions had to be considered in light of the Indian Child Welfare Act's placement preferences unless the foster parents established good cause for not following them.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Silk had a statutory right under Rule 24(a), M.R.Civ.P., to intervene in the adoption proceedings based on her status as an extended family member under the Indian Child Welfare Act.
2. Whether Silk could pursue a petition for adoption despite the absence of consent from the state agency.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded