Erickson v. Raspperry

• Decision Date: 01 November 1946
• Citation: 320 Mass. 333,69 N.E.2d 474
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court
• Parties: ARTHUR R. ERICKSON & another v. ALICE L. (RADIVONYK) RASPPERRY.

320 Mass. 333

69 N.E.2d 474

ARTHUR R. ERICKSON & another v. ALICE L. (RADIVONYK) RASPPERRY.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Essex.

November 1, 1946

October 9, 1946.

Present: FIELD, C.

J., DOLAN, RONAN WILKINS, & SPALDING, JJ.

Adoption. Minor.

The fact, that the mother of a child, shortly after his birth, voluntarily and with full knowledge of the effect of her action, signed her assent upon a petition by others for his adoption and change of his name, did not require the granting of the petition over the mother's subsequent objection where, after a hearing, the judge warrantably found that it was "for the best interest of the child to be brought up by" the mother: the paramount consideration was the welfare of the child.

PETITION, filed in the Probate Court for the county of Essex on February 3 1945.

The case was heard by Phelan, J. M. Misci, for the petitioners.

H. R. Mayo, Jr. for the respondent.

DOLAN, J. This is an appeal by the petitioners from a decree entered in the Probate Court dismissing their petition for leave to adopt Ann Marie Radivonyk, the infant daughter of the respondent.

The evidence is not reported but the judge made a report of the material facts found by him, which may be summed up as follows: The respondent, formerly Alice L. Radivonyk, gave birth to the child sought to be adopted on May 12, 1944. The respondent was then a single woman and has since married. About two weeks after the birth of the child the respondent brought her to the home of her parents in Framingham as she had no other place to go and no means of supporting the child until she returned to work. Her parents were unwilling to have the child remain in their home, and the respondent's sister made arrangements for someone to take the child until the respondent could get on her feet, and on June 16, 1944, gave the child to the petitioners without disclosing to the respondent where the child was. Later on that day counsel for the petitioners called upon the respondent at her parents' home, discussed with her the adoption of the child by the petitioners, produced a petition for adoption and change of name of the child, "completely made out" with the exception of its date and the signatures of the adopting parents, and informed the respondent that the petition would not be filed for six months. He read the petition to her with the exception of the names of the petitioners and the court in which it was to be filed. He then "covered up on the petition the names and addresses of the petitioners," and the respondent signed her assent to the petition. About a week thereafter the respondent requested her sister to tell her the name of the person to whom she had delivered the child, but her sister refused to do so. On subsequent occasions she also refused to do so. The petition was filed in the Probate Court on February 3, 1945, and notice thereof was...