Hughes v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that statute did not bar challenge to void adoption judgment where applying statute of limitations would interfere with vested property rights
• using the term subject-matter jurisdiction in the context of a case that turned on the failure of the adoption court to give notice to the biological mother of the adoption proceeding
• granting biological child's petition declaring him the legal heir of his deceased mother where the biological mother was not given notice of the adoption proceedings nor was her consent obtained and no exception to such requirement was satisfied
• concerning adoption decrees entered after the effective date of ORS 109.381
• “Consent to an adoption by parents or guardian or other person in loco parentis is jurisdictional, except where the statute does not require it.”
• “ ‘consent lies at the foundation of statutes of adoption, and * * * the court cannot take jurisdiction of the subject-matter without it’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).