Winans v. Luppie
| Decision Date | 18 November 1890 |
| Parties | WINANS v. LUPPIE. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from prerogative court; RUNYON, Ordinary.
Cortlandt Parker, for appellant. John W. Taylor, for appellee.
On January 23, 1882, David Winans and Francis C., his wife, presented their petition to the orphans' court of Essex county, praying for the adoption of Mary Luppie, a child then about 10 years old. The child's father had died in its early infancy, leaving a widow with three children, of whom this was the youngest. Her mother, Mary Luppie, was still living, and did not consent to, but opposed, the petition. Mr. Winans, one of the petitioners, was the child's legal guardian, having been appointed by said court January 18, 1882, and as such gave his written consent to the adoption. On May 13, 1882, the orphans' court decreed that the prayer of the petition should be granted, holding that the consent of the child's mother was not necessary, because the child was under 14 years of age, and also because the mother had abandoned the child. On appeal by Mrs. Luppie to the prerogative court, it was there, on June 23, 1883, adjudged that the statute required the consent of parents to the adoption of a child, as well when it was under 14 years old as afterwards, and that Mrs. Luppie had not abandoned her child, and consequently that the orphans' court had no authority to decree in favor of the adoption. On June 25, 1883, Mr. Winans having died in the meantime, Mrs. Winans appealed to this court.
The decision of the legal questions presented depends upon "an act providing for the adoption of children," approved March 9, 1877. Revision, p. 1345. The first section, after enacting that children may be adopted, has the following language: "Provided, that, if such child or children be of the age of fourteen years, or over, the written consent of such child or children to such adoption, duly acknowledged, must be obtained and presented with the petition, and also the written consent of the parent or parents, if living, and not hopelessly intemperate or insane; if both parents should be dead, or unknown, or hopelessly intemperate or insane, or shall have abandoned the child or children sought to be adopted, then, and in such case, the written consent, acknowledged as aforesaid, must be obtained from the legal guardian of such child or children; and if there be no legal guardian, then such consent must be obtained from some discreet and suitable person appointed by the court to be the next friend of such child or children sought to be adopted." It cannot be denied, I think, that on the surface the language of the clauses just quoted seems to require the consent of parents, (if living, etc.,) only when the consent of the child to be adopted is required; i. e., when it has reached the age of 14 years. But the spirit of our laws, and the indubitable reason of this enactment, do not admit of such a superficial interpretation. The regard entertained for the relation between parent and child, which dictated the enactment, that the consent of parents to the legal severance of that relation was requisite when the child was 14 years of age, or over, would still more strongly impel the legislature to require such consent when the tendered age of the child was in the greater need of parental protection, and appealed the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Neuwirth's Estate, Matter of
...reflected a settled purpose to repudiate parental status. Sees v. Baber 74 N.J. 201, 211, 377 A.2d 628 (1977); Winans v. Luppies, 47 N.J.Eq. 302, 305, 20 A. 969 (E. & A.1890). The concept of abandonment foreshadowed the 1953 statutory standard of "forsaken parental obligations." The procedu......
-
Sees v. Baber
...or substitute for consent, embracing "any conduct" reflecting "a settled purpose" to repudiate parental status. Winans v. Luppie, 47 N.J.Eq. 302, 305, 20 A. 969 (E.&A. 1890); Wood v. Wood, 77 N.J.Eq. 593, 77 A. 91 (E.&A. 1910). The concept of abandonment foreshadowed the later statutory sta......
-
N, In re
...failure 'to perform the natural and regular obligations of care and support of the child.' R.S. 9:3--4(h). See Winans v. Luppie, 47 N.J.Eq. 302, 304--305, 20 A. 969 (E. & A. 1890). Consent was a jurisdictional prerequisite except in cases covered by the enumerated exceptions. Stawicky v. St......
-
N.J. Div. of Child Prot. & Permanency v. A.B. (In re A.F.)
...and relinquish all parental claims to the child.[ 11 N.J. 473, 480, 95 A.2d 6 (1953) (emphasis added) (quoting Winans v. Luppie, 47 N.J. Eq. 302, 304, 20 A. 969 (E. & A. 1890) ).]Conduct by a parent that evinces a settled purpose to forego all parental duties and relinquish all parental cla......