Ex parte Clark
Citations
- 87 Cal. 638
- 25 P. 967
- 1891 Cal. LEXIS 1038
Syllabus
<p>Adoption — Void Order— Different Names. —An order of adoption of a child is void, and affords no warrant for the detention of the child from its parents, where it appears that the parents consented to the adoption of the child by a person of one name, that the agreement to adopt is signed by another name, and that the detention is by a person whose name does not appear in the record of the proceeding, there being nothing in the record to show that the three names indicate one and the same person.</p> <p>Id. — Residence of Person Adopting. —It is essential to the validity of an adoption that the record should show that the person adopting the child is a resident of the county in which the order of adoption was made.</p> <p>Id. — Superior Court — Special and Limited Jurisdiction.—In cases of adoption, the power of the superior court is special and limited, and not exercised according to the course of the common law; and its jurisdiction must affirmatively appear by the record as to both subject-matter and the person, notwithstanding the court is one of general jurisdiction.</p> <p>Id. ■— Common Law —• Statutory Right — Strict Compliance with Statute. — The right of adoption is purely statutory, and unknown to the common law and repugnant to its principles; and the provisions of the statute must be strictly followed, and every condition prescribed therein strictly complied with, else the child by adoption cannot inherit from the adopting parent.</p> <p>Id.—Rights of Natural Parents —Doubts Resolved in their Favor. ■—No transfer of the rights of natural parents can be acquired by adopting parents unless the statute regulating adoption is strictly followed, and all doubts in controversies between the natural and the adopting parents should be resolved in favor of the former.</p> <p>Id.—Habeas Corpus — Amendment of Record of Adoption.—Proceedings taken to amend the record of adoption pending the determinations, upon writ of habeas corpus, of the right to a transfer of
Judges: Paterson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
20 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Purinton v. JamrockMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1907-04-02· cited 87×
- Jolicoeur v. MihalyCalifornia Supreme Court· 1971-08-27· cited 63×
- Davey v. Los Angeles County Bureau of AdoptionsCalifornia Supreme Court· 1960-07-01· cited 61×
- In re Estate of WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court· 1894-03-29· cited 52×
- Keal v. RhydderckIllinois Supreme Court· 1925-04-24· cited 42×
- Dye v. BattlesCalifornia Court of Appeal· 2001-10-09· cited 31×
- McConnell v. McConnellIllinois Supreme Court· 1931-06-18· cited 26×
- Albring v. WardMichigan Supreme Court· 1904-07-27· cited 26×
- Barney v. HutchinsonNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1918-12-31· cited 24×
- Henry v. TaylorSouth Dakota Supreme Court· 1903-02-04· cited 19×
- In re SwallNevada Supreme Court· 1913-07-15· cited 16×
- Vaughan v. HubbardIdaho Supreme Court· 1923-12-31· cited 9×
- Tilge v. United StatesCustoms and Patent Appeals· 1911-05-31· cited 8×
- Halleck v. BresnahenWyoming Supreme Court· 1883-11-22· cited 7×
- Ex Parte HelscelSupreme Court of Oklahoma· 1954-03-02· cited 6×
- Platt v. MagagniniWashington Supreme Court· 1920-02-09· cited 5×
- Adams v. AdamsMississippi Supreme Court· 1912-03-15· cited 4×
- Lev v. College of MarinCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1971-12-28· cited 1×
- Alread v. RickmanOregon Supreme Court· 1960-10-05· cited 1×
- In re Estate of RentonCalifornia Superior Court, San Francisco County· 1892-06-01
Cites
2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.