Case Name: ADOPTION of Rachel Marie LATIOLAIS
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1980-05-19
Citations: 384 So. 2d 377
Docket Number: No. 66078
Parties: ADOPTION of Rachel Marie LATIOLAIS.
Judges: MARCUS, J., dissents and assigns reasons.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 384
Pages: 377–379

Head Matter:
ADOPTION of Rachel Marie LATIOLAIS.
No. 66078.
Supreme Court of Louisiana.
May 19, 1980.
Rehearing Denied June 23, 1980.
Richard J. Putnam, Jr., Abbeville, for defendant-respondent, Glenn Latiolais.
James M. Cunningham, III, Edwards, Stefanski & Barousse, Crowley, for plaintiff-applicant, Kenneth James Guidry.

Opinion:
BLANCHE, Justice.
Kenneth James Guidry seeks to adopt Rachel Marie Latiolais, the child of his wife by her first marriage. Sherald Glenn La-tiolais, the child's father, has opposed the adoption. The trial court granted the adoption, ruling that since Mr. Latiolais had not paid court-ordered child support for a period in excess of one year, the necessity for his consent was obviated, and considering applicant's fitness as an adoptive parent, the adoption would be granted. R.S. 9:422.1. The court of appeal reversed, 376 So.2d 555 (La.App. 3d Cir. 1979), finding that the adoption was not in the child's best interest. We agree.
R.S. 9:422.1 does not set the criteria to be used in determining whether or not an adoption shall be granted. It applies only to the narrow question of whether parental consent shall be required when a minor's adoption is sought. The best interest of the child is the major standard to which a court must look before it can determine when or whether to order an adoption. R.S. 9:432. See also the full scope of requisites which the law makes applicable to adoptions. R.S. 9, § 421-441.
The courts below were correct that Mr. Latiolais' consent would not be required before an adoption could be ordered; he had failed to pay the child support which he was obligated to pay under court order. However, no showing was made by petitioner that Rachel Marie's best interest will be served by permitting the adoption here sought. On the contrary, Mr. Latiolais has shown that he and his daughter have a very close and loving relationship which has been maintained over the years since Mr. Latio-lais and Mrs. Guidry were separated in 1971, at which time Rachel Marie was between two and three years old. Mr. Guidry failed to show how the adoption, which would rupture the relationship between Rachel Marie and her father, would be in the child's best interest. The record contains no evidence which relates to this crucial factor and which could be the basis for granting the adoption.
The decision of the court of appeal was correct and should be affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
MARCUS, J., dissents and assigns reasons.
DENNIS, J., dissents with reasons.
Chief Judge FREDERICK S. ELLIS participated in this decision as Associate Justice Ad Hoc.