Title: Vice v. Andrews

State: arkansas

Issuer: Arkansas Supreme Court

Document:

Vickie VICE v. Lena Loraine ANDREWS and Larry
Duane Andrews, Jr.

96-544                                             ___ S.W.2d ___

                    Supreme Court of Arkansas
                 Opinion delivered May 19, 1997


1.   Parent & child -- visitation rights of grandparents discussed. -- The
     laws relating to adoption are derived from statutes, and at
     common law, a grandparent could not maintain an action for
     visitation rights to a grandchild except as a party to a
     custody proceeding; any right that a grandparent possesses
     must be either derived from statutes or conferred by a court
     of competent jurisdiction pursuant to statute.

2.   Adoption -- rights of adoptive and natural parents discussed. --
     Statutory declarations of public policy favor the rights of an
     adoptive family over the interests of biological relatives;
     under Ark. Code Ann.  9-9-215(a)(1) (Supp. 1995), except with
     respect to the adopting parent's spouse and his or her
     relatives, the effect of the final decree of adoption is to
     "terminate all legal relationships between the adopted
     individual and his natural relatives, including his natural
     parents, so that the adopted individual thereafter is a
     stranger to his former relatives for all purposes"; when a
     natural parent consents to the adoption of a child by another
     person, the consenting parent's relatives lose their legal
     rights to visitation because such rights are derivative of the
     consenting parent's rights and likewise are terminated when
     parental rights are ended.
3.   Adoption -- biological grandparent no longer entitled to visitation
     privileges. -- Because all legal relationships terminate once a
     child is adopted, a biological grandparent is no longer
     legally entitled to visitation privileges.

4.   Adoption -- statutory exception to termination of grandparents' visitation
     rights not applicable. -- The limited exception to the termination
     of grandparents' visitation rights codified at Ark. Code Ann.
      9-9-215(a)(1) (Supp. 1995) did not apply to the facts in
     this case because the statute specifically relates to
     visitation rights derived through a deceased parent when those
     rights are asserted before the adoption decree is entered.

5.   Appeal & error -- appellant provided no authority for notice claim. --
     Appellant biological grandmother provided no authority for any
     claim that she was legally entitled to notice of the adoption
     or deprived of any right to intervene in the adoption
     proceedings.

6.   Adoption -- chancellor did not err in dismissing appellant's petition for
     visitation. -- The supreme court agreed with the chancellor's
     determination that appellant biological grandmother's rights
     were derivative of her son's rights and that the effect of
     Ark. Code Ann.  9-13-215 was to terminate those rights; the
     court held that the chancellor did not err in granting the
     motion to dismiss appellant's petition for visitation.


     Appeal from Ashley Chancery Court; Jerry Mazzanti, Chancellor;
affirmed.
     Hani W. Hashem, for appellant.
     Michael D. Ray, for appellees.

     Ray Thornton, Associate Justice
     Ricky Wilkinson and Lena Loraine Andrews were divorced in
Alabama on November 26, 1991.  One child, Margaret LeAnn, was born
to the couple during their marriage.  Lena Loraine later married
Larry Duane Andrews, Jr., and they moved to Arkansas.  A petition
was filed in probate court to allow Larry Duane to adopt the minor
child, and Ricky Wilkinson, the biological father, consented to
this proposed adoption according to the provisions of Ark. Code
Ann.  9-9-220 (Supp. 1995).  On August 16, 1995, the final decree
of adoption was entered granting Larry Duane's adoption of Margaret
LeAnn.  Appellant, Vickie Vice, is the mother of Ricky Wilkinson,
and therefore is the biological grandmother of Margaret LeAnn.  
     This case presents the issue whether a biological
grandmother's statutory right to petition for visitation can
withstand a motion to dismiss on grounds that an adoption
terminated the legal relationship between the child and her
biological grandmother.  The chancery court found that the
adoption, which was granted with the consent of the biological
father, not only terminated any relationship he might have with his
daughter, but also terminated any rights of visitation which his
mother, Ms. Vice, might claim.  We agree and affirm.
     From the time of King Solomon, the decision as to which of two
competing claimants should be allowed to nurture and rear a young
child has challenged the best efforts of our institutions of
jurisprudence.  Unlike many controversies whose resolution depends
upon a judgment as to which party is right and which party is
wrong, a choice between the rights of an adopting parent and
visitation by a biological grandparent requires a decision between
parties who truly and sincerely care for the child.
     The public policy regarding this issue has been established by
legislation.  The laws relating to adoption are derived from
statutes; and at common law, a grandparent could not maintain an
action for visitation rights to a grandchild except as a party to
a custody proceeding.  Reed v. Glover, 319 Ark. 16,